Discussion Question

434

13-1 Contrast leadership and power.

13-2 Explain the three bases of formal power and the two bases of personal power.

13-3 Explain the role of dependence in power relationships.

13-4 Identify power or influence tactics and their contingencies.

13-5 Identify the causes and consequences of abuse of power.

13-6 Describe how politics work in organizations.

13-7 Identify the causes, consequences, and ethics of political behavior.

13 Power and Politics

LEARNING OBJECTIVES After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

So ur

ce : K

im H

on g-

Ji /R

eu te

rs /A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 434 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 435

A TALE OF PRESIDENTIAL CORRUPTION

Answer quickly: If someone were given the ability to exert his or her will over others for his or her self-interest, would this person do it? On Wednesday, December 19, 2012, Park Guen-hye became the first

female president of South Korea. Park was considered a trailblazer in South Korean politics and the heir to a long political legacy. The 60-year-old politician was the daughter of former South Korean president Park Chung- hee. Guen-hye had begun her political career at a young age when, at the age of 22, she took on first lady duties after her mother’s assassination by a North Korean gunman. When she became president of South Korea, she made many promises, making many citizens hopeful that she would revive the country’s slowing economic growth. These promises included pushing for regulations of some of South Korea’s largest companies, such as Samsung and Hyundai. Park ran and won based on pledges to support and build small and medium-sized businesses while encouraging more exports.

Within four years, Park Guen-hye was impeached and tried on charges of corruption. Park had always been close to Choi Soon-sil, the daughter of another public figure. Soon-sil’s father was the head of the Church of Eternal Life and a close family friend of former president Park Chung-hee.

Employability Skills Matrix (ESM)

Myth or Science?

Career OBjectives

An Ethical Choice

Point/ Counterpoint

Experiential Exercise

Ethical Dilemma

Case Incident 1

Case Incident 2

Critical Thinking ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Communication ✓ ✓ ✓ Collaboration ✓ ✓ Knowledge

Application and Analysis

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Social Responsibility ✓ ✓ ✓

MyLab Management Chapter Warm Up If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/ mylab/management to complete the chapter warm up.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 435 29/09/17 4:15 pm

436 PART 3 The Group

It seems Choi used her long-time friendship with the president to force Sam- sung and many other large companies to donate to her charities. The scan- dal goes much deeper than bribes, however. Choi had an unusual amount of power over the leader of South Korea. Besides using her relationship with the president to gain $70 million in donations to her nonprofit foundations, Choi also was given illegal access to confidential documents and edited presidential speeches.

Park Guen-hye won the election partly because she was seen as less corrupt than her predecessors. In the last 30 years of democracy in South Korea, two presidents have already been jailed. President Lee Myung-bak was also implicated in a bribery scandal before leaving office. Similar to Park, Lee’s friend and brother Sang-deuk used his connection to the presi- dent to collect bribes from two Korean banks. Several of Lee’s former aides were also charged with receiving bribes.

So what caused Park’s transformation from South Korea’s seemingly least corrupt politician to an impeached president charged with corrup- tion? Some South Koreans believe that Choi’s power as a religious leader and family friend is to blame. Did Choi have influence over the new presi- dent because she held the keys to her salvation? Or was Park corrupted by receiving tremendous power?

The tale of Park’s downfall is not unique to South Korea. Political par- ties are considered the most corrupt public institutions, according to Trans- parency International’s 2013 survey on global corruption. The organization found that a quarter of survey respondents had paid a bribe to politicians in the past year. Around the globe, from India to southern Europe to the United States, there are stories of political leaders using their power for their own self-interest. This phenomenon occurs at all levels. In Florida, former Opa-locka commissioner Luis Santiago used his position to gain $40,000 in bribes. In Maryland, state senator Nathaniel T. Oaks was caught pushing through legislation for a fake real estate project in exchange for $15,000 in bribes.

In all these stories, officials were elected to serve the interests of the public, yet they used their power to serve their own interests instead. Many of these citizens were elected because they claimed they could clean up a corrupt system. Then, when they gained power themselves, they used their influence to further their own goals. As we can see from Park Guen- hye’s story, however, there are other ways of gaining power besides obtain- ing a leadership position in politics. Cho Soon-sil obtained power through religious institutions and personal connections. Many of the bribery scan- dals described above were possible because someone controlled resources such as wealth or economic power.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 436 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 437

Sources: Based on M. Park, P. Hancocks and K. J. Kwon, “Park Guen-hye Claims South Korea Presidential Victory,” CNN, December 19, 2012, http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/18/world/ asia/south-korea-presidential-election/; K. J. Kwon and M. Park, “South Korean Presi- dent Apologizes for Bribery Scandals in His Inner Circle,” CNN, July 24, 2012, http://www .cnn.com/2012/07/24/world/asia/south-korean-president-apology/index.html; Associ- ated Press, “Impeached South Korean President Indicted, Faces Trial,” New York Post, April 17, 2017, http://nypost.com/2017/04/17/impeached-south-korean-president- indicted/; BBC Profiles, “Profile: South Korean President Park Guen-hye,” BBC News, March 10, 2017, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-20787271; A. E. Marimow and O. Wiggins, “Code Word ‘Lollipop’: That Was Bribe Cue for Maryland State Senator, Investi- gators Charge,” The Washington Post, April 7, 2017; J. Weaver, “Opa-locka Politician Pleads Guilty to Bribery, as FBI Continues Corruption Probe,” Miami Herald, January 10, 2017, http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article125617409.html; R. Jennings, “Five Things to Know about South Korea’s Presidential Scandal,” Forbes, November 9, 2016, https://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphjennings/2016/11/09/5-sad-and-creepy-things-you- should-know-about-south-koreas-presidential-scandal/#59a510541556; and K. Rapoza, “Transparency International Spells It Out: Politicians Are the Most Corrupt,” Forbes, July 9, 2013, https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2013/07/09/transparency-international- spells-it-out-politicians-are-the-most-corrupt/#7497bca21c33.

In this chapter, we will learn about power, including how a person obtains power and the tactics employees use to exert their will over others. We will also learn the role of political behavior in maintaining power within an orga- nization. Power in organizations is a compelling force: People who have power deny it, people who want it try not to look like they’re seeking it, and those who are good at getting it are secretive about how they do so.1 We begin by explor- ing our natural association of power with leadership.

Power and Leadership In organizational behavior (OB), power refers to the capacity that A has to influence the behavior of B so that B acts in accordance with A’s wishes.2 Some- one can thus have power but not use it; it is a capacity or potential. Probably the most important aspect of power is that it is a function of dependence. The greater B’s dependence on A, the greater A’s power in the relationship. Depen- dence, in turn, is based on alternatives that B perceives and the importance B places on the alternative(s) that A controls. A person can have power over you only if he or she controls something you desire. If you want a college degree and have to pass a certain course to get it, and your current instructor is the only faculty member in the college who teaches that course, she has power over you because your alternatives are highly limited and you place a high degree of importance on the outcome. Similarly, if you’re attending college on funds pro- vided by your parents, you probably recognize the power they hold over you. But once you’re out of school, have a job, and are making a good income, your parents’ power is reduced significantly.

Money is a powerful variable for dependence. Who among us has not heard of a rich relative who controls family members merely through the implicit or

13-1 Contrast leadership and power. power The capacity that A has to influence the behavior of B so that B acts in accordance with A’s wishes.

dependence B’s relationship to A when A possesses something that B requires.

MyLab Management Watch It If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/ mylab/management to complete the video exercise.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 437 29/09/17 4:15 pm

438 PART 3 The Group

explicit threat of “writing them out of the will”? Another example is found on Wall Street, where portfolio manager Ping Jiang allegedly was able to coerce his subordinate, analyst Andrew Tong, into taking female hormones and wearing lipstick and makeup. Why such power? Jiang controlled Tong’s access to day trading and thus his livelihood.3

A careful comparison of our description of power with our description of leadership in Chapter 12 reveals the concepts are closely intertwined. Leaders use power as a means of attaining group goals. How are the two terms, leader- ship and power, different? Power does not require goal compatibility, just depen- dence. Leadership, on the other hand, requires some congruence between the goals of the leader and those being led. A second difference relates to the direction of influence. Leadership research focuses on the downward influence on followers. It minimizes the importance of lateral and upward influence pat- terns. Power research takes all factors into consideration. For a third difference, leadership research often emphasizes style. It seeks answers to questions such as: “How supportive should a leader be?” and “How much decision making should be shared with followers?” In contrast, the research on power focuses on tactics for gaining compliance. Leadership concentrates on the individual leader’s influence, while the study of power acknowledges that groups as well as individuals can use power to control other individuals or groups.

You may have noted that, for a power situation to exist, one person or group needs to have control over resources that the other person or group values. This is usually the case in established leadership situations. However, power relationships are possible in all areas of life, and power can be obtained in many ways. Let’s explore the various sources of power next.

Bases of Power Where does power come from? What gives an individual or a group influence over others? We answer these questions by dividing the bases or sources of power into two general groupings—formal and personal—and breaking down each into more specific categories.4

Formal Power Formal power is based on an individual’s position in an organization. It can come from the ability to coerce or reward, or from formal authority.

Coercive Power The coercive power base depends on the target’s fear of nega- tive results from failing to comply. On the physical level, coercive power rests on the application, or the threat of application, of bodily distress through the infliction of pain, the restriction of movement, or the withholding of basic physiological or safety needs.

At the organizational level, A has coercive power over B if A can dismiss, sus- pend, or demote B, assuming B values her job. If A can assign B work activities B finds unpleasant, or treat B in a manner B finds embarrassing, A possesses coer- cive power over B. Coercive power comes also from withholding key informa- tion. People in an organization who have data or knowledge that others need can make others dependent on them. When subordinates are being abused by supervisors, coercive power is the main force that keeps them from retaliating.5

Reward Power The opposite of coercive power is reward power, which people comply with because it produces positive benefits; someone who can distribute rewards that others view as valuable has power over them. These rewards can be

13-2 Explain the three bases of formal power and the two bases of personal power.

coercive power A power base that depends on fear of the negative results from failing to comply.

reward power Compliance achieved based on the ability to distribute rewards that others view as valuable.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 438 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 439

financial—such as controlling pay rates, raises, and bonuses—or nonfinancial, including recognition, promotions, interesting work assignments, friendly col- leagues, and preferred work shifts or sales territories.6

Legitimate Power In formal groups and organizations, probably the most com- mon access to one or more of the power bases is through legitimate power. It represents the formal authority to control and use organizational resources based on the person’s structural position in the organization.

Legitimate power is broader than the power to coerce and reward. Spe- cifically, it includes members’ acceptance of the authority of a hierarchical position. We associate power so closely with the concept of hierarchy that just drawing longer lines in an organization chart leads people to infer the leaders are especially powerful.7 In general, when school principals, bank presidents, or army captains speak, teachers, tellers, and first lieutenants usually comply.

Personal Power Many of the most competent and productive chip designers at Intel have power, but they aren’t managers and they have no formal power. What they have is per- sonal power, which comes from an individual’s unique characteristics.8 There are two bases of personal power: expertise and the respect and admiration of others. Personal power is not mutually exclusive from formal power, but it can be independent.

Expert Power Expert power is influence wielded as a result of expertise, spe- cial skills, or knowledge.9 As jobs become more specialized, we become depen- dent on experts to achieve goals. It is generally acknowledged that physicians have expertise and hence expert power: Most of us follow our doctor’s advice. Computer specialists, tax accountants, economists, industrial psychologists, and other specialists wield power as a result of their expertise.

legitimate power The power a person receives as a result of his or her position in the formal hierarchy of an organization.

expert power Influence based on special skills or knowledge.

Internet entrepreneur Mark Zucker- berg, cofounder and CEO of Facebook, has expert power. Shown here talking with employees, Zuckerberg earned the title “software guy” during college because of his expertise in computer programming. Today, Facebook depends on his expertise to achieve company goals. Source: Tony Avelar/FR155217/AP Images

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 439 29/09/17 4:15 pm

440 PART 3 The Group

Referent Power Referent power is based on identification with a person who has desirable resources or personal traits.10 If I like, respect, and admire you, you can exercise power over me because I want to please you.

Referent power develops out of admiration of another and a desire to be like that person. It helps explain, for instance, why celebrities are paid millions of dollars to endorse products in commercials. Marketing research shows peo- ple such as LeBron James and Tom Brady have the power to influence your choice of athletic shoes and credit cards. With a little practice, you and I could probably deliver as smooth a sales pitch as these celebrities, but the buying public doesn’t identify with us. Some people who are not in formal leadership positions have referent power and exert influence over others because of their charismatic dynamism, likability, and emotional appeal.11

Which Bases of Power Are Most Effective? Of the three bases of formal power (coercive, reward, legitimate) and two bases of personal power (expert, referent), which are most important? Research sug- gests the personal sources of power are most effective. Both expert and ref- erent power are positively related to employees’ satisfaction with supervision, their organizational commitment, and their performance, whereas reward and legitimate power seem to be unrelated to these outcomes. One source of for- mal power—coercive power—can be damaging.

Referent power can be a powerful motivator. Consider Steve Stoute’s com- pany, Translation, which matches pop-star spokespersons with corporations that want to promote their brands. Stoute has paired Justin Timberlake with McDonald’s, Beyoncé with Tommy Hilfiger, and Jay-Z with Reebok. Stoute’s business seems to be all about referent power. His firm aims to use the cred- ibility of artists and performers to reach youth culture.12 The success of these well-known companies attests to Stoute’s expectation that the buying public identifies with and emulates his spokespersons and therefore thinks highly of the represented brands.

Dependence: The Key to Power The most important aspect of power is that it is a function of dependence. In this section, we show how understanding dependence helps us understand the degrees of power.

The General Dependence Postulate Let’s begin with a general postulate: The greater B’s dependence on A, the more power A has over B. When you possess anything others require that you alone control, you make them dependent on you and therefore you gain power over them.13 As the old saying goes, “In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king!” But if something is plentiful, possessing it will not increase your power. Therefore, the more you can expand your own options, the less power you place in the hands of others. This explains why most organizations develop multiple suppliers rather than give their business to only one. It also explains why so many people aspire to financial independence. Independence reduces the power others can wield to limit our access to opportunities and resources.

What Creates Dependence? Dependence increases when the resource you control is important, scarce, and nonsubstitutable.14

referent power Influence based on iden- tification with a person who has desirable resources or personal traits.

13-3 Explain the role of dependence in power relationships.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 440 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 441

Importance If nobody wants what you have, it’s not going to create depen- dence. Note, however, that there are many degrees of importance, from need- ing the resource for survival to wanting a resource that is in fashion or adds to convenience.

Scarcity Ferruccio Lamborghini, who created the exotic supercars that still carry his name, understood the importance of scarcity and used it to his advan- tage during World War II. When Lamborghini was in Rhodes with the Italian army, his superiors were impressed with his mechanical skills because he dem- onstrated an almost uncanny ability to repair tanks and cars no one else could fix. After the war, he admitted his ability was largely due to his having been the first person on the island to receive the repair manuals, which he memorized and then destroyed to make himself indispensable.15

We see the scarcity–dependence relationship in the power situation of employment. Where the supply of labor is low relative to demand, workers can negotiate compensation and benefits packages far more attractive than those in occupations with an abundance of candidates. For example, today, college administrators have no problem finding English instructors because there is a high supply and low demand. In contrast, the market for network systems ana- lysts is comparatively tight, with demand high and supply limited. The result- ing bargaining power of computer-engineering faculty members allows them to negotiate higher salaries, lighter teaching loads, and other benefits.

Nonsubstitutability The fewer viable substitutes for a resource, the more power a person controlling that resource has. At universities that value faculty publishing, for example, the more recognition the faculty member receives through publication, the more control that person has because other universi- ties want faculty members who are highly published and visible.

Social Network Analysis: A Tool for Assessing Resources One tool to assess the exchange of resources and dependencies within an organization is social network analysis.16 This method examines patterns of com- munication among organizational members to identify how information flows

Scientist Maria Kovalenko is in a position of power at Gilead Sciences, a research-based biopharmaceutical firm. Scientists are in a powerful occupational group at Gilead because they discover and develop medicines that improve the lives of patients and contribute to Gilead’s growth and success. Source: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg/Getty Images

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 441 29/09/17 4:15 pm

442 PART 3 The Group

between them. Within a social network, or connections between people who share professional interests, each individual or group is called a node, and the links between nodes are called ties. When nodes communicate or exchange resources frequently, they are said to have very strong ties. Other nodes that are not engaged in direct communication with one another achieve resource flows through intermediary nodes. In other words, some nodes act as brokers between otherwise unconnected nodes. A graphical illustration of the asso- ciations among individuals in a social network is called a sociogram and func- tions like an informal version of an organization chart. The difference is that a formal organization chart shows how authority is supposed to flow, whereas a sociogram shows how resources really flow in an organization. An example of a sociogram is shown in Exhibit 13-1.

Networks can create substantial power dynamics, such as enforcing norms (see Chapter 9) or creating change within an organization. Thus, employ- ees who have many connections to an organizational social network are less likely to engage in corruption.17 Those in the position of brokers tend to have more power because they can leverage the unique resources they can acquire from different groups. In other words, many people depend on bro- kers, which gives the brokers more power. For example, organizational culture changes such as corporate social responsibility (CSR) awareness often begin in a single connected group of individuals, grow in strength, and then slowly move to other connected groups through brokers over time.18 Data from the United Kingdom’s National Health Service show that change agents—people entrusted with helping an organization to make a significant change—have more success if they are information brokers.19 These functions are not with- out cost, however. One study found that people identified as central to advice

An Organizational SociogramExhibit 13-1

Project Team

Suppliers

Operations

Albert

Thomas

AnneMartha

Eric

Sales & Marketing

Finance

Customer ServiceCustomers

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 442 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 443

networks were more likely to quit their jobs, possibly because they did a great deal of extra work without reward.20

A social network analysis in an organization can be implemented in many ways.21 Some organizations keep track of the flow of e-mail communications or document sharing across departments. These big-data tools are an easy way to gather objective information about how individuals exchange information. Other organizations look at data from human resources (HR) information sys- tems, analyzing how supervisors and subordinates interact with one another. These data sources can produce sociograms showing how resources and power flow. Leaders can then identify powerful brokers who exert the strongest influence on many groups, and address these key individuals.

Power Tactics What power tactics do people use to translate power bases into specific action? What options do they have for influencing their bosses, coworkers, or employ- ees? Research has identified nine distinct influence tactics:22

• Legitimacy. Relying on your authority position or saying that a request is in accordance with organizational policies or rules.

• Rational persuasion. Presenting logical arguments and factual evidence to demonstrate that a request is reasonable.

• Inspirational appeals. Developing emotional commitment by appealing to a target’s values, needs, hopes, and aspirations.

• Consultation. Increasing support by involving the target in deciding how to accomplish your plan.

• Exchange. Rewarding the target with benefits or favors in exchange for acceding to a request.

• Personal appeals. Asking for compliance based on friendship or loyalty. • Ingratiation. Using flattery, praise, or friendly behavior prior to making a

request. • Pressure. Using warnings, repeated demands, and threats. • Coalitions. Enlisting the aid or support of others to persuade the target to

agree.

Using Power Tactics Some tactics are more effective than others. Rational persuasion, inspirational appeals, and consultation tend to be the most effective, especially when the audience is highly interested in the outcomes of a decision process. The pres- sure tactic tends to backfire and is typically the least effective of the nine.23 You can increase your chance of success by using two or more tactics together or sequentially, as long as your choices are compatible.24 Using ingratiation and legitimacy together can lessen negative reactions, but only when the audience does not really care about the outcome of a decision process or the policy is routine.25

Let’s consider the most effective way of getting a raise. You can start with a rational approach—figure out how your pay compares to that of your orga- nizational peers, land a competing job offer, gather data that testify to your performance, or use salary calculators like Salary.com to compare your pay with others in your occupation—then share your findings with your manager. The results can be impressive. Kitty Dunning, a vice president at Don Jagoda Associ- ates, landed a 16 percent raise when she e-mailed her boss numbers showing she had increased sales.26

13-4 Identify power or influ-ence tactics and their contingencies.

power tactics Ways in which individuals translate power bases into specific actions.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 443 29/09/17 4:15 pm

444 PART 3 The Group

While rational persuasion may work in this situation, the effectiveness of some influence tactics depends on the direction of influence,27 and of course on the audience. As Exhibit 13-2 shows, rational persuasion is the only tac- tic effective across organizational levels. Inspirational appeals work best as a downward-influencing tactic with subordinates. When pressure works, it’s generally downward only. Personal appeals and coalitions are most effective as lateral influence. Other factors relating to the effectiveness of influence include the sequencing of tactics, a person’s skill in using the tactic, and the organizational culture.

In general, you’re more likely to be effective if you begin with “softer” tac- tics that rely on personal power, such as personal and inspirational appeals, rational persuasion, and consultation. If these fail, you can move to “harder” tactics, such as exchange, coalitions, and pressure, which emphasize formal power and incur greater costs and risks.28 A single soft tactic is more effective than a single hard tactic, and combining two soft tactics or a soft tactic and rational persuasion is more effective than any single tactic or combination of hard tactics.29

As we mentioned, the effectiveness of tactics depends on the audience.30 People especially likely to comply with soft power tactics tend to be more reflec- tive and intrinsically motivated; they have high self-esteem and a greater desire for control. Those likely to comply with hard power tactics are more action- oriented and extrinsically motivated, and more focused on getting along with others than on getting their own way.

Cultural Preferences for Power Tactics Preference for power tactics varies across cultures.31 Those from individualist countries tend to see power in personalized terms and as a legitimate means of advancing their personal ends, whereas those in collectivist countries see power in social terms and as a legitimate means of helping others.32 A study comparing managers in the United States and China found U.S. managers pre- ferred rational appeal, whereas Chinese managers preferred coalition tactics.33 Reason-based tactics are consistent with the U.S. preference for direct con- frontation and rational persuasion to influence others and resolve differences, while coalition tactics align with the Chinese preference for meeting difficult or controversial requests with indirect approaches.

Applying Power Tactics People differ in their political skill, or their ability to influence others to attain their own objectives. The politically skilled are more effective users of all influence tactics, leading to many positive outcomes in the workplace. People who are politically skilled have higher self-efficacy, job satisfaction,

Preferred Power Tactics by Influence DirectionExhibit 13-2

Upward Influence Downward Influence Lateral Influence

Rational persuasion Rational persuasion Inspirational appeals Pressure Consultation Ingratiation Exchange Legitimacy

Rational persuasion Consultation Ingratiation Exchange Legitimacy Personal appeals Coalitions

political skill The ability to influence others so that one’s objectives are attained.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 444 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 445

work productivity, and career success. They are less likely to be victims of workplace aggression. Political skill is also more effective when the stakes are high, such as when the individual is accountable for important orga- nizational outcomes. Finally, the politically skilled are able to exert their influence without others detecting it, a key element in effectiveness (it’s damaging to be labeled political).34 These individuals are able to use their political skills in environments with low levels of procedural and distributive justice. Politically skilled individuals tend to receive higher performance ratings when they ask strategically for feedback in a way that enhances their image in the organization.35 However, when an organization has fairly applied rules, free of favoritism or biases, political skill is actually negatively related to job performance ratings.36

We know cultures within organizations differ markedly—some are warm, relaxed, and supportive; others are formal and conservative. Some encourage participation and consultation, some encourage reason, and still others rely on pressure. People who fit the culture of the organization tend to obtain more influence.37 Specifically, extraverts tend to be more influential in team-oriented organizations, and highly conscientious people are more influential in organizations that value working alone on technical tasks. People who fit the culture are influential because they can perform especially well in the domains deemed most important for success. Thus, the organization itself influences which subset of power tactics is viewed as acceptable for use.

How Power Affects People Until this point, we’ve discussed what power is and how it is acquired. But we’ve not yet answered one important question: “Does power corrupt?”

There is certainly evidence that there are corrupting aspects of power. Power leads people to place their own interests ahead of others’ needs or goals. Why does this happen? Power not only leads people to focus on their self-interests because they can, it liberates them to focus inward and thus come to place greater weight on their own aims and interests. Power also appears to lead indi- viduals to “objectify” others (to see them as tools to obtain their instrumental goals) and to see relationships as more peripheral.38

That’s not all. Powerful people react—especially negatively—to any threats to their competence. People in positions of power hold on to power when they can, and individuals who face threats to their power are exceptionally willing to take actions to retain it whether their actions harm others or not. Those given power are more likely to make self-interested decisions when faced with a moral hazard, such as when hedge fund managers take more risks with other people’s money because they’re rewarded for gains but less often punished for losses. People in power are more willing to denigrate others. Power also leads to overconfident decision making.39

Frank Lloyd Wright, perhaps the greatest U.S. architect, is a good example of power’s corrupting effects. Early in his career, Wright worked for and was mentored by a renowned architect, Louis Sullivan (sometimes known as the father of the skyscraper). Before Wright achieved greatness, he was generous in his praise for Sullivan. Later in his career, that praise faded, and Wright even took credit for one of Sullivan’s noted designs. Wright was never a benevolent man, but as his power accumulated, so did his potential to behave in a “mon- strous” way toward others.40

13-5 Identify the causes and consequences of abuse of power.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 445 29/09/17 4:15 pm

446 PART 3 The Group

Power Variables As we’ve discussed, power does appear to have some important disturbing effects on us. But that is hardly the whole story—power is more complicated than that. It doesn’t affect everyone in the same way, and there are even posi- tive effects of power. Let’s consider each of these in turn.

First, the toxic effects of power depend on the wielder’s personality. Research suggests that if we have an anxious personality, power does not corrupt us because we are less likely to think that using power benefits us.41 Second, the corrosive effect of power can be contained by organizational systems. One study found, for example, that while power made people behave in a self-serving manner, when accountability for this behavior was initiated, the self-serving behavior stopped. Third, we have the means to blunt the negative effects of power. One study showed that simply expressing gratitude toward powerful oth- ers makes them less likely to act aggressively against us. Finally, remember the saying that those with little power abuse what little they have? There seems to be some truth to this in that the people most likely to abuse power are those who start low in status and gain power. Why? It appears having low status is threaten- ing, and the fear this creates is used in negative ways if power is later given.42

As you can see, some factors can moderate the negative effects of power. But there can be general positive effects. Power energizes and increases motivation to achieve goals. It can also enhance our motivation to help others. One study found, for example, that a desire to help others translated into actual work behavior when people felt a sense of power.43

This study points to an important insight about power. It is not so much that power corrupts as it reveals what we value. Supporting this line of reasoning, another study found that power led to self-interested behavior only in those with a weak moral identity (the degree to which morals are core to someone’s identity). In those with a strong moral identity, power enhanced their moral awareness and willingness to act.44

Sexual Harassment: Unequal Power in the Workplace Sexual harassment is defined as any unwanted activity of a sexual nature that affects an individual’s employment or creates a hostile work environment. According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), sexual harassment happens when a person encounters “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature” on the job that disrupts work performance or that creates an “intimidating, hostile, or offensive” work environment.45 Although the defini- tion changes from country to country, most nations have at least some poli- cies to protect workers. Whether the policies or laws are followed is another question, however. Equal employment opportunity legislation is established in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Oman, for example, but studies suggest it might not be well implemented.46

Generally, sexual harassment is more prevalent in male-dominated societ- ies. For example, a study in Pakistan found that up to 93 percent of female workers were sexually harassed.47 In Singapore, up to 54 percent of workers (women and men) reported they were sexually harassed.48 The percentages in the United States and some other countries are generally much lower but still troubling. Surveys indicate about one-quarter of U.S. women and 10 percent of men have been sexually harassed.49 Data from the EEOC suggest that sexual harassment is decreasing: Sexual harassment claims now make up 10 percent of all discrimination claims, compared with 20 percent in the mid-1990s. Of this percentage, though, claims from men have increased from 11 percent of total claims in 1997 to 17.5 percent today.50 Sexual harassment is disproportionately

sexual harassment Any unwanted activity of a sexual nature that affects an individual’s employment and creates a hostile work environment.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 446 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 447

prevalent for women in certain types of jobs. In the restaurant industry, for instance, 80 percent of female wait staff reported having been sexually harassed by coworkers or customers, compared to 70 percent of male wait staff.51

Most studies confirm that power is central to understanding sexual harass- ment.52 This seems true whether the harassment comes from a supervisor, coworker, or employee. And sexual harassment is more likely to occur when there are large power differentials. The supervisor–employee dyad best charac- terizes an unequal power relationship, where formal power gives the supervisor the capacity to reward and coerce. Because employees want favorable perfor- mance reviews, salary increases, and the like, supervisors control resources most employees consider important and scarce. When there aren’t effective controls to detect and prevent sexual harassment, abusers are more likely to act. For example, male respondents in one study in Switzerland who were high in hostile sexism reported higher intentions to engage in sexual harassment in organizations that had low levels of justice, suggesting that failure to have con- sistent policies and procedures for all employees might increase levels of sexual harassment.53

Sexual harassment can have a detrimental impact on individuals and the organization, but it can be avoided. The manager’s role is critical:

1. Make sure an active policy defines what constitutes sexual harassment, informs employees they can be fired for inappropriate behavior, and establishes procedures for making complaints.

2. Reassure employees that they will not encounter retaliation if they file a complaint. 3. Investigate every complaint, and inform the legal and HR departments. 4. Make sure offenders are disciplined or terminated. 5. Set up in-house seminars to raise employee awareness of sexual harassment issues.

The bottom line is that managers have a responsibility to protect their employ- ees from a hostile work environment. They may easily be unaware that one of their employees is being sexually harassed, but being unaware does not protect them or their organization. If investigators believe a manager could have known about the harassment, both the manager and the company can be held liable.

A federal jury awarded this woman a $95 million judgment in a sexual harassment lawsuit against her employer for harassment from her supervisor that included unwanted physical contact. The jury found the supervisor guilty of assault and battery, and the company liable for negligent supervision and sexual harassment. Source: Bill Greenblatt/UPI/Newscom

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 447 29/09/17 4:15 pm

448 PART 3 The Group

Politics: Power in Action Whenever people get together in groups, power will be exerted. People in organizations want to carve out a niche to exert influence, earn rewards, and advance their careers. If they convert their power into action, we describe them as being engaged in politics. Those with good political skills have the ability to use their bases of power effectively.54 Politics are not only inevitable; they might be essential, too (see OB Poll).

Definition of Organizational Politics There is no shortage of definitions of organizational politics. Essentially, this type of politics focuses on the use of power to affect decision making in an organiza- tion, sometimes for self-serving and organizationally unsanctioned behaviors.55 For our purposes, political behavior in organizations consists of activities that are not required as part of an individual’s formal role but that influence, or attempt to influence, the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within the organization.56

This definition encompasses what most people mean when they talk about organizational politics. Political behavior is outside specified job requirements. It requires some attempt to use power bases. It includes efforts to influence the goals, criteria, or processes used for decision making. Our definition is broad enough to include varied political behaviors such as withholding key information from decision makers, joining a coalition, whistle-blowing, spread- ing rumors, leaking confidential information to the media, exchanging favors with others for mutual benefit, and lobbying on behalf of or against a partic- ular individual or decision alternative. In this way, political behavior is often negative, but not always.

The Reality of Politics Interviews with experienced managers show that most believe political behav- ior is a major part of organizational life.57 Many managers report some use of political behavior is ethical, as long as it doesn’t directly harm anyone else.

13-6 Describe how politics work in organizations.

political behavior Activities that are not required as part of a person’s formal role in the organization but that influence, or attempt to influence, the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within the organization.

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Creativity

4%

Initiative

18%

Hard work

27%

Politics

51%

How do employees get ahead in your organization?

OB POLL Importance of Organizational Politics

Source: Based on D. Crampton, “Is How Americans Feel about Their Jobs Changing?” (September 28, 2012), http://corevalues.com/employee-motivation/ is-how-americans-feel-about-their-jobs-changing.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 448 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 449

They describe politics as necessary and believe someone who never uses politi- cal behavior will have a hard time getting things done. Most also indicate that they have never been trained to use political behavior effectively. But why, you may wonder, must politics exist? Isn’t it possible for an organization to be politics-free? It’s possible—but unlikely.

Organizations have individuals and groups with different values, goals, and interests.58 This sets up the potential for conflict over the allocation of limited resources, such as budgets, work space, and salary and bonus pools. If resources were abundant, all constituencies within an organization could satisfy their goals. But because they are limited, not everyone’s interests can be satisfied. Furthermore, gains by one individual or group are often perceived as coming at the expense of others within the organization (whether they are or not). These forces create competition among members for the organization’s limited resources.

Maybe the most important factor leading to politics within organizations is the realization that most of the “facts” used to allocate limited resources are open to interpretation. When allocating pay based on performance, for instance, what is good performance? What’s an adequate improvement? What constitutes an unsatisfactory job? The manager of any major league baseball team knows a .400 hitter is a high performer and a .125 hitter is a poor per- former. You don’t need to be a baseball genius to know you should play your .400 hitter and send the .125 hitter back to the minors. But what if you have to choose between players who hit .280 and .290? Then less objective factors come into play: fielding expertise, attitude, potential, ability to perform in a clutch, loyalty to the team, and so on. More managerial decisions resemble the choice between a .280 and a .290 hitter than between a .125 hitter and a .400 hitter. It is in this large and ambiguous middle ground of organizational life—where the facts don’t speak for themselves—that politics flourish.

Because most decisions have to be made in a climate of ambiguity— where facts are rarely objective and thus open to interpretation—people within organizations will use whatever influence they can to support their

Whistle-blower Michael Woodford was fired from his position as CEO of Japa- nese camera-maker Olympus after informing company officials about accounting irregularities. Although not part of his job, Woodford uncovered a 13-year accounting fraud by some company executives. Source: Luke McGregor/Reuters

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 449 29/09/17 4:15 pm

450 PART 3 The Group

goals and interests. That, of course, creates the activities we call politicking. One person’s “selfless effort to benefit the organization” is seen by another as a “blatant attempt to further his or her interest.”59

Therefore, to answer the question of whether it is possible for an organiza- tion to be politics-free, we can say yes—if all members of that organization hold the same goals and interests, if organizational resources are not scarce, and if performance outcomes are completely clear and objective. But that doesn’t describe the organizational world in which most of us live.

The Causes and Consequences of Political Behavior Now that we’ve discussed the constant presence of politicking in organizations, let’s discuss the causes and consequences of these behaviors.

Factors Contributing to Political Behavior Not all groups or organizations are equally political. In some organizations, politicking is overt and rampant, while in others politics plays a small role in influencing outcomes. Why this variation? Research and observation have iden- tified a number of factors that appear to encourage political behavior. Some are individual characteristics, derived from the qualities of the people employed by the organization; others are a result of the organization’s culture or inter- nal environment. Exhibit 13-3 illustrates how both individual and organiza- tional factors can increase political behavior and provide favorable outcomes (increased rewards and averted punishments) for individuals and groups in the organization.

Individual Factors At the individual level, researchers have identified cer- tain personality traits, needs, and other factors likely to be related to political behavior. In terms of traits, we find that employees who are high self-monitors,

13-7 Identify the causes, consequences, and ethics of political behavior.

Factors That Influence Political BehaviorExhibit 13-3

Political behavior Low High

Favorable outcomes • Rewards • Averted punishments

Individual factors • High self-monitors • Internal locus of control • High Machiavellian personality • Organizational investment • Perceived job alternatives • Expectations of success

Organizational factors • Reallocation of resources • Promotion opportunities • Low trust • Role ambiguity • Unclear performance evaluation system • Zero-sum reward practices • Democratic decision making • High performance pressures • Self-serving senior managers

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 450 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 451

possess an internal locus of control, and have a high need for power are more likely to engage in political behavior. The high self-monitor is more sensitive to social cues, exhibits higher levels of social conformity, and is more likely to be skilled in political behavior than the low self-monitor. Because they believe they can control their environment, individuals with an internal locus of control are more prone to take a proactive stance and attempt to manipulate situations in their favor. Not surprisingly, the Machiavellian personality trait—characterized by the will to manipulate and the desire for power—is consistent with using politics as a means to further personal interests.

An individual’s investment in the organization and perceived alternatives influence the degree to which he or she will pursue illegitimate means of polit- ical action.60 The more a person expects increased future benefits from the organization, and the more that person has to lose if forced out, the less likely he or she is to use illegitimate means. Conversely, the more alternate job oppor- tunities an individual has—due to a favorable job market, possession of scarce skills or knowledge, prominent reputation, or influential contacts outside the organization—the more likely the person is to employ politics.

An individual with low expectations of success from political means is unlikely to use them. High expectations from such measures are most likely to be the province of both experienced and powerful individuals with polished political skills, and inexperienced and naïve employees who misjudge their chances.

Some individuals engage in more political behavior because they simply are better at it. Such individuals read interpersonal interactions well, fit their behavior to situational needs, and excel at networking.61 These people are often indirectly rewarded for their political efforts. For example, a study of a construction firm in southern China found that politically skilled subordinates were more likely to receive recommendations for rewards from their supervi- sors and that politically oriented supervisors were especially likely to respond positively to politically skilled subordinates.62 Other studies from countries around the world have also shown that higher levels of political skill are associ- ated with higher levels of perceived job performance.63

Organizational Factors Although we acknowledge the role that individual dif- ferences can play, the evidence more strongly suggests that certain situations and cultures promote politics. Specifically, when an organization’s resources are declining, when the existing pattern of resources is changing, and when there is opportunity for promotions, politicking is more likely to surface.64 When resources are reduced, people may engage in political actions to safe- guard what they have. Also, any changes, especially those implying significant reallocation of resources within the organization, are likely to stimulate conflict and increase politicking.

Cultures characterized by low trust, role ambiguity, unclear performance evaluation systems, zero-sum (win–lose) reward allocation practices, demo- cratic decision making, high pressure for performance, and self-serving senior managers will also create breeding grounds for politicking.65 Because political

MyLab Management Try It If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/ mylab/management to complete the Mini Sim.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 451 29/09/17 4:15 pm

452 PART 3 The Group

activities are not required as part of the employee’s formal role, the greater the role ambiguity, the more employees can engage in unnoticed political activity. Role ambiguity means that the prescribed employee behaviors are not clear; therefore, there are fewer limits to the scope and functions of the employee’s political actions.

The more an organizational culture emphasizes the zero-sum or win–lose approach to reward allocations, the more employees will be motivated to engage in politicking. The zero-sum approach treats the reward “pie” as fixed, so any gain one person or group achieves comes at the expense of another person or group. For example, if $15,000 is distributed among five employees for raises, any employee who gets more than $3,000 takes money away from one or more of the others. Such a practice encourages making others look bad and increasing the visibility of what you do.

There are also political forces at work in the relationships between orga- nizations, where politics work differently depending on the organizational cultures.66 One study showed that when two organizations with very political environments interacted with one another, the political interactions between

zero-sum approach An approach that treats the reward “pie” as fixed so that any gains by one individual are at the expense of another.

Career OBjectives Should I become political?

My office is so political! Everyone is just looking for ways to get ahead by plotting and scheming rather than doing the job. Should I just go along with it and develop my own political strategy?

— Julia

Dear Julia: There’s definitely a temptation to join in when other people are behaving politically. If you want to advance your career, you need to think about social relationships and how to work with other people in a smart and diplomatic way. But that doesn’t mean you have to give in to pressure to engage in organi- zational politics.

Of course, in many workplaces, hard work and achievement aren’t recog- nized, which heightens politicking and lowers performance. But politics aren’t just potentially bad for the company. People who are seen as political can be gradually excluded from social networks and informal communication. Coworkers can sabotage a person with a reputation for dishonesty or manipulation so they don’t have to deal with him or her. It’s

also likely that a political person will be the direct target of revenge from those who feel they’ve been wronged.

If you want to provide a positive alternative to political behavior in your workplace, there are a few steps you can take:

• Document your work efforts, and find data to back up your accomplish- ments. Political behavior thrives in an ambiguous environment where standards for success are subjec- tive and open to manipulation. The best way to shortcut politics is to move the focus toward clear, objec- tive markers of work performance.

• Call out political behavior when you see it. Political behavior is, by its very nature, secretive and underhanded. By bringing politics to light, you limit this capacity to manipulate people against one another.

• Try to develop a network with only those individuals who are interested in performing well together. This makes it hard for a very political per- son to get a lot done. On the other hand, trustworthy and cooperative

people will be able to find many allies who are genuinely supportive. These support networks will result in performance levels that a lone politi- cal person simply cannot match.

Remember, in the long run a good reputation can be your greatest asset!

Sources: Based on A. Lavoie “How to Get Rid of Toxic Office Politics,” Fast Company, April 10, 2014, http://www.fastcompany .com/3028856/work-smart/how-to-make-office- politicking-a-lame-duck; C. Conner, “Office Politics: Must You Play?,” Forbes, April 14, 2013, http://www.forbes.com/sites/ cherylsnappconner/2013/04/14/office-politics- must-you-play-a-handbook-for-survivalsuccess/; and J. A. Colquitt and J. B. Rodell, “Justice, Trust, and Trust worthiness: A Longitudinal Analysis Integrating Three Theoretical Per- spectives,” Academy of Management Journal 54 (2011): 1183–206.

The opinions provided here are of the manag- ers and authors only and do not necessar- ily reflect those of their organizations. The authors or managers are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or managers, or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the opinions provided here.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 452 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 453

Organizations foster politicking when they reduce resources. By announcing plans to downsize its global workforce of 100,000 employees in an effort to increase its competitiveness, French pharmaceutical firm Sanofi stimulated political activity among employees who organized protests against the job cuts. Source: Robert Pratta/Reuters

Myth or Science? Powerful Leaders Keep Their (Fr)Enemies Close

This statement appears to be true.We all have heard the term frenemies to describe friends who are also rivals or people who act like friends but secretly dislike each other. Some observers have argued that frenemies are increasing at work due to the “abundance of very close, intertwined relationships that bridge people’s professional and personal lives.”

Keeping enemies close may be one reason Barack Obama appointed Hill- ary Clinton secretary of state after their bitter battle for the U.S. presidency, or in the business world, why one entre- preneur decided not to sue a former college classmate who, after working for her startup as a consultant, took

that knowledge and started his own, competing company.

Is it really wise to keep your ene- mies close? And, if so, why?

New research suggests answers to these questions. Three experimental studies found individuals chose to work in the same room as their rival even when informed they would probably perform better apart, sit closer to rivals when working together, and express an explicit preference to be closer to the rival. The researchers further found the primary reason for the “being closer” effect was the desire to monitor the rival’s behavior and performance.

The researchers also found the “keeping enemies closer” effect was strong under certain conditions—when

the individual was socially dominant, when the individual felt more com- petition from the team member, and when rewards and the ability to serve as leader were dependent on performance.

These results suggest the concept of frenemies is very real and that we choose to keep our rivals close so we can keep an eye on the competition they bring.

Sources: Based on M. Thompson, “How to Work with Your Startup Frenemies,” Venture- Beat, December 22, 2012, http://venturebeat .com/2012/12/22/frenemies/; and N. L. Mead and J. K. Maner, “On Keeping Your Ene- mies Close: Powerful Leaders Seek Proximity to Ingroup Power Threats,” Journal of Per- sonality and Social Psychology 102 (2012): 576–91.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 453 29/09/17 4:15 pm

454 PART 3 The Group

them hurt performance in collaborative projects. On the other hand, when companies with less internal political behavior interacted with one another, even political disputes between them did not lead to lower performance in collaborative projects. This study shows companies should be wary of forming alliances with companies that have high levels of internal political behavior.

How Do People Respond to Organizational Politics? Trish loves her job as a writer on a weekly U.S. television comedy series but hates the internal politics. “A couple of the writers here spend more time kiss- ing up to the executive producer than doing any work. And our head writer clearly has his favorites. While they pay me a lot and I get to really use my cre- ativity, I’m sick of having to be on alert for backstabbers and constantly having to self-promote my contributions. I’m tired of doing most of the work and get- ting little of the credit.” We all know friends or relatives like Trish who regularly complain about the politics at their jobs. But how do people in general react to organizational politics? Let’s look at the evidence.

For most people who have modest political skills or are unwilling to play the politics game, outcomes tend to be predominantly negative. See Exhibit 13-4 for a diagram of this situation. However, very strong evidence indicates perceptions of organizational politics are negatively related to job satisfaction.67 Politics may lead to self-reported declines in employee perfor- mance, perhaps because employees perceive political environments to be unfair, which demotivates them.68 Not surprisingly, when politicking becomes too much to handle, it can lead employees to quit.69 When employees of two agencies in a study in Nigeria viewed their work environments as political, they reported higher levels of job distress and were less likely to help their coworkers. Thus, although developing countries such as Nigeria present per- haps more ambiguous and therefore more political environments in which to work, the negative consequences of politics appear to be the same as in the United States.70

There are some qualifiers. First, the politics–performance relationship appears to be moderated by an individual’s understanding of the hows and

Employee Responses to Organizational PoliticsExhibit 13-4

Organizational politics may

threaten employees

Decreased job satisfaction

Increased anxiety and stress

Increased turnover

Reduced performance

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 454 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 455

whys of organizational politics. Researchers noted, “An individual who has a clear understanding of who is responsible for making decisions and why they were selected to be the decision makers would have a better understanding of how and why things happen the way they do than someone who does not understand the decision-making process in the organization.”71 When both politics and understanding are high, performance is likely to increase because these individuals see political activity as an opportunity. This is consistent with what you might expect for individuals with well-honed political skills. But when understanding is low, individuals are more likely to see politics as a threat, which can have a negative effect on job performance.72

Second, political behavior at work moderates the effects of ethical leader- ship.73 One study found that male employees were more responsive to ethical leadership and showed the most citizenship behavior when levels of both poli- tics and ethical leadership were high. Women, on the other hand, appeared most likely to engage in citizenship behavior when the environment was consis- tently ethical and apolitical.

Third, when employees see politics as a threat, they often respond with defensive behaviors—reactive and protective behaviors to avoid action, blame, or change.74 (Exhibit 13-5 provides some examples.) In the short run, employees may find that defensiveness protects their self-interest, but in the long run it wears them down. People who consistently rely on defen- siveness find that eventually it is the only way they know how to behave. At that point, they lose the trust and support of their peers, bosses, employees, and clients.

defensive behaviors Reactive and protective behaviors to avoid action, blame, or change.

Defensive BehaviorsExhibit 13-5

Avoiding Action

Overconforming. Strictly interpreting your responsibility by saying things like “The rules clearly state...”or “This is the way we’ve always done it.” Buck passing. Transferring responsibility for the execution of a task or decision to someone else. Playing dumb. Avoiding an unwanted task by falsely pleading ignorance or inability. Stretching. Prolonging a task so that one person appears to be occupied—for example, turning a two-week task into a 4-month job. Stalling. Appearing to be more or less supportive publicly while doing little or nothing privately.

Avoiding Blame

Bluffing. Rigorously documenting activity to project an image of competence and thoroughness, known as “covering your rear.” Playing safe. Evading situations that may reflect unfavorably. It includes taking on only projects with a high probability of success, having risky decisions approved by superiors, qualifying expressions of judgment, and taking neutral positions in conflicts.

Justifying. Developing explanations that lessen one’s responsibility for a negative outcome and/or apologizing to demonstrate remorse, or both. Scapegoating. Placing the blame for a negative outcome on external factors that are not entirely blameworthy. Misrepresenting. Manipulation of information by distortion, embellishment, deception, selective presentation, or obfuscation.

Avoiding Change

Prevention. Trying to prevent a threatening change from occurring. Self-protection. Acting in ways to protect one’s self-interest during change by guarding information or other resources.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 455 29/09/17 4:15 pm

456 PART 3 The Group

Impression Management We know people have an ongoing interest in how others perceive and evaluate them. For example, North Americans spend billions of dollars on diets, health club memberships, cosmetics, and plastic surgery—all intended to make them more attractive to others. Being perceived positively by others has benefits in an organizational setting. It might, for instance, help us initially to get the jobs we want in an organization and, once hired, to get favorable evaluations, supe- rior salary increases, and more rapid promotions. The process by which indi- viduals attempt to control the impressions that others form of them is called impression management (IM).75

Who might we predict will engage in IM? No surprise here. It’s our old friend, the high self-monitor.76 Low self-monitors tend to present images of themselves that are consistent with their personalities, regardless of the ben- eficial or detrimental effects for them. In contrast, high self-monitors are good at reading situations and molding their appearances and behavior to fit each situation. If you want to control the impressions others form of you, what IM techniques can you use? Exhibit 13-6 summarizes some of the most popular with examples.

Keep in mind that when people engage in IM, they are sending a false mes- sage that might be true under other circumstances.77 Excuses, for instance, may be offered with sincerity. Referring to the example in Exhibit 13-6, you can actually believe that ads contribute little to sales in your region. But misrepre- sentation can have a high cost. If you cry wolf once too often, no one is likely to believe you when the wolf really comes. So the impression manager must be cautious not to be perceived as insincere or manipulative.78

One study found that when managers attributed an employee’s citizen- ship behaviors to impression management, they actually felt angry (probably because they felt manipulated) and gave subordinates lower performance rat- ings. When managers attributed the same behaviors to prosocial values and concern about the organization, they felt happy and gave higher performance ratings.79 In sum, people don’t like to feel others are manipulating them through impression management, so such tactics should be employed with caution. Not all impression management consists of talking yourself up, either. Recent research suggests modesty, in the form of generously providing credit to others and understating your own contributions to success, may create a more positive impression on others.80

Most of the studies to test the effectiveness of IM techniques have related IM to two criteria: interview success and performance evaluations. Let’s con- sider each of these.

Interviews and IM The evidence indicates that most job applicants use IM tech- niques in interviews and that it works.81 Interviewers are rarely able to detect when an individual is engaging in impression management, especially when applicants are using deception to engage in impression management.82 To develop a sense of how effective different IM techniques are in interviews, one study grouped data from thousands of recruiting and selection interviews into appearance-oriented efforts (like looking professional), explicit tactics (like flattering the interviewer or talking up your own accomplishments), and ver- bal cues (like using positive terms and showing general enthusiasm).83 Across all the dimensions, it was quite clear that IM was a powerful predictor of how well people did. However, there was a twist. When interviews were highly struc- tured, meaning the interviewer’s questions were written out in advance and focused on applicant qualifications, the effects of IM were substantially weaker. Manipulative behaviors like IM are more likely to have an effect in ambigu- ous and unstructured interviews. In addition, the effectiveness of impression

impression management (IM) The process by which individuals attempt to control the impressions that others form of them.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 456 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 457

management depends on the applicants’ ability to correctly identify what traits or skills the interviewer is looking for.84

Performance Evaluations and IM In terms of performance evaluations, the picture is quite different. Ingratiation is positively related to performance rat- ings, meaning those who ingratiate themselves with their supervisors get higher performance evaluations. However, self-promotion appears to backfire: Those

Impression Management (IM) TechniquesExhibit 13-6

Conformity

Agreeing with someone else’s opinion to gain his or her approval is a form of ingratiation. Example: A manager tells his boss, “You’re absolutely right on your reorganization plan for the western regional office. I couldn’ t agree with you more.”

Favors

Doing something nice for someone to gain that person’ s approval is a form of ingratiation. Example: A salesperson says to a prospective client, “I’ve got two tickets to the theater tonight that I can’t use. Take them. Consider it a thank-you for taking the time to talk with me.”

Excuses

Explaining a predicament-creating event aimed at minimizing the apparent severity of the predicament is a defensive IM technique. Example: A sales manager says to her boss, “We failed to get the ad in the paper on time, but no one responds to those ads anyway.”

Apologies

Admitting responsibility for an undesirable event and simultaneously seeking to get a pardon for the action is a defensive IM technique. Example: An employee says to his boss, “I’m sorry I made a mistake on the report. Please forgive me.”

Self-Promotion

Highlighting your best qualities, downplaying your deficits, and calling attention to your achievements is a self-focused IM technique. Example: A salesperson tells his boss, “Matt worked unsuccessfully for three years to try to get that account. I sewed it up in six weeks. I’m the best closer this company has.”

Enhancement

Claiming that something you did is more valuable than most other members of the organizations would think is a self-focused IM technique. Example: A journalist tells his editor, “My work on this celebrity divorce story was really a major boost to our sales” (even though the story only made it to page 3 in the entertainment section).

Flattery

Complimenting others about their virtues in an effort to make yourself appear perceptive and likeable is an assertive IM technique.

Example: A new sales trainee says to her peer, “You handled that client’s complaint so tactfully! I could never have handled that as well as you did.”

Exemplification

Doing more than you need to in an effort to show how dedicated and hard working you are is an assertive IM technique. Example: An employee sends e-mails from his work computer when he works late so that his supervisor will know how long he’s been working.

Source: Based on M. C. Bolino, K. M. Kacmar, W. H. Turnley, and J. B. Gilstrap, “A Multi-Level Review of Impression Management Motives and Behaviors,” Journal of Management 34, no. 6 (2008): 1080–109.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 457 29/09/17 4:15 pm

458 PART 3 The Group

who self-promote actually may receive lower performance ratings.85 There is an important qualifier to these general findings. It appears that individuals high in political skill are able to translate IM into higher performance appraisals, whereas those lower in political skill are more likely to be hurt by their IM attempts.86 Another study of 760 boards of directors found that individuals who ingratiated themselves with current board members (e.g., expressed agreement with the director, pointed out shared attitudes and opinions, complimented the director) increased their chances of landing on a board.87 Interns who attempted to use ingratiation with their supervisors in one study were usually disliked—unless they had high levels of political skill. For those who had this ability, ingratiation led to higher levels of liking from supervisors and higher performance ratings.88

What explains these consistent results across multiple studies and contexts? If you think about them, they make sense. Ingratiating always works because everyone—both interviewers and supervisors—likes to be treated nicely. How- ever, self-promotion may work only in interviews and backfire on the job: The interviewer has little idea whether you’re blowing smoke about your accom- plishments, but the supervisor knows because it’s his or her job to observe you.

Are our conclusions about responses to politics valid around the world? Should we expect employees in Israel, for instance, to respond the same way

An Ethical Choice How Much Should You Manage Interviewer Impressions?

A lmost everyone agrees that dressing professionally, high-lighting previous accomplish- ments, and expressing interest in the job are reasonable impression management tactics to improve your presentation in an interview. Strate- gies like flattering the interviewer and using positive nonverbal cues like smiling and nodding are also often advised.

Is there an upside to such impres- sion management? Research gener- ally shows there is. The more effort applicants put into highlighting their skills, motivation, and admiration for the organization, the more likely they are to be hired. A recent study in Tai- wan examined this relationship, find- ing that interviewers saw applicants who talked confidently about their qualifications as a better fit for the job, and applicants who said positive things about the organization as a better fit for the organization. Positive

nonverbal cues improved interviewer moods, which also improved the appli- cant’s ratings.

Despite evidence that making an effort to impress an interviewer can pay off, you can go too far. Evidence that a person misrepresented qualifications in the hiring process is usually grounds for immediate termination. Even so- called white lies are a problem if they create unfounded expectations. For example, if you noted that you man- aged budgets in the past when all you were doing was tracking expenditures, you lack skills your boss will expect you to have. When you fail to deliver, it will look very bad for you. However, if you describe your experience more accu- rately but note your desire to learn, the company will know you need additional training and that you’ll need a bit of extra time.

So what does an ethical, effective interview strategy entail? The key is to find a positive but truthful way to

manage impressions. Don’t be afraid to let an employer know about your skills and accomplishments, and be sure to show your enthusiasm for the job. At the same time, keep your state- ments as accurate as possible, and be careful not to overstate your abilities. In the long run, you’re much more likely to be happy and successful in a job where both you and the interviewer can assess fit honestly.

Sources: Based on C. Chen and M. Lin, “The Effect of Applicant Impression Management Tactics on Hiring Recommendations: Cogni- tive and Affective Processes,” Applied Psy- chology: An International Review 63, no. 4, (2014): 698–724; J. Levashina, C. J. Hartwell, F. P. Morgeson, and M. A. Campion “The Structured Employment Interview: Narrative and Quantitative Review of the Research Lit- erature,” Personnel Psychology (Spring 2014): 241–93; and M. Nemko, “The Effective, Ethical, and Less Stressful Job Interview,” Psychology Today, March 25, 2014, https:// www.psychologytoday.com/blog/how-do- life/201503/the-effective-ethical-and-less- stressful-job-interview.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 458 29/09/17 4:15 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 459

to workplace politics that employees in the United States do? Almost all our conclusions on employee reactions to organizational politics are based on stud- ies conducted in North America. The few studies that have included other countries suggest some minor modifications.89 One study of managers in U.S. culture and three Chinese cultures (People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan) found U.S. managers evaluated “gentle persuasion” tactics such as consultation and inspirational appeal as more effective than did their Chinese counterparts.90 Other research suggests effective U.S. leaders achieve influence by focusing on the personal goals of group members and the tasks at hand (an analytical approach), whereas influential East Asian leaders focus on rela- tionships among group members and meeting the demands of people around them (a holistic approach).91 Another study of Chinese supervisors and sub- ordinates found that subordinates were seen as more agreeable and conscien- tious when they engaged in self-effacing behaviors, but only if these behaviors made them appear modest rather than supplicating.92

The Ethics of Behaving Politically Although there are no clear-cut ways to differentiate ethical from unethical politicking, there are some questions you should consider. For example, what is the utility of engaging in politicking? Sometimes we do it for little good reason. Major league baseball player Al Martin claimed he played football at the Uni- versity of Southern California (USC) when in fact he never did. As a baseball player, he had little to gain by pretending to have played football! Outright lies like this may be a rather rare and extreme example of impression manage- ment, but many of us have at least distorted information to make a favorable impression. One thing to keep in mind is whether it’s worth the risk. Another issue to consider is whether the utility of engaging in the political behavior will balance out harm (or potential harm) to others. Complimenting a supervisor on her appearance in order to curry favor is probably much less harmful than grabbing credit for a project that others deserve.

Finally, does the political activity conform to standards of equity and justice? Sometimes it is difficult to weigh the costs and benefits of a political action, but its ethicality is clear. The department head who inflates the performance evaluation of a favored employee and deflates the evaluation of a disfavored employee—and then uses these evaluations to justify giving the former a big raise and the latter nothing—has treated the disfavored employee unfairly.

Unfortunately, powerful people can become very good at explaining self- serving behaviors in terms of the organization’s best interests. They can persua- sively argue that unfair actions are really fair and just. Those who are powerful, articulate, and persuasive are most vulnerable to ethical lapses because they are more likely to get away with them. When faced with an ethical dilemma regard- ing organizational politics, try to consider whether playing politics is worth the risk and whether others might be harmed in the process. If you have a strong power base, recognize the ability of power to corrupt. Remember it’s a lot eas- ier for the powerless to act ethically, if for no other reason than they typically have very little political discretion to exploit.

MyLab Management Personal Inventory Assessments Go to www.pearson.com/mylab/management to complete the Personal Inventory Assessment related to this chapter.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 459 29/09/17 4:16 pm

460 PART 3 The Group

Mapping Your Political Career As we have seen, politics is not just for politicians. You can use the concepts presented in this chapter in some very tangible ways in your organization. How- ever, they also have another application: you.

One of the most useful ways to think about power and politics is in terms of your own career. What are your ambitions? Who has the power to help you achieve them? What is your relationship to these people? The best way to answer these questions is with a political map, which can help you sketch out your relationships with the people on whom your career depends. Exhibit 13-7 contains such a political map.93 Let’s walk through it.

Assume your future promotion depends on five people, including Jamie, your immediate supervisor. As you can see in the exhibit, you have a close rela- tionship with Jamie (you would be in real trouble otherwise). You also have a close relationship with Zack in finance. However, with the others, you have either a loose relationship (Lane) or none at all (Jia, Marty). One obvious implication of this map is the need to formulate a plan to gain more influence over, and a closer relationship with, these people. How might you do that?

The map also provides for a useful way to think about the power network. Assume the five individuals all have their own networks. In this case, though, assume these aren’t so much power networks like yours as they are influence networks of the people who influence the individuals in power positions.

Drawing Your Political MapExhibit 13-7

Zack Finance

Jamie Operations

Jamie Operations

CJ Jamie’s Favorite Blogger

Chris Jamie’s Spouse

Anna Senior

VP, Jamie’s Boss

Green is a close connection. Blue is a loose connection. Red is no connection at all.

Area of Detail

Marty IT

Lane HR

You

Jia Sales

Tamar Drew’s

Best Friend

Mark Jamie’s Former

Coworker

Source: Based on D. Clark, “A Campaign Strategy for Your Career,” Harvard Business Review (November 2012): 131–4.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 460 29/09/17 4:16 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 461

One of the best ways to influence people is indirectly. What if you played in a tennis league with Mark, Jamie’s former coworker who you know remains friends with Jamie? To influence Mark, in many cases, may also be to influence Marty. In addition, why not post an entry on CJ’s blog? You can complete a simi- lar analysis for the other four decision makers and their networks.

Of course, this map doesn’t show you everything you need to know—no map does. For example, rarely would all five people have the same amount of power. Maps are also harder to construct in the era of large social networks. Try to keep such a map limited to the people who really matter to your career.

All of this may seem a bit Machiavellian to you. Remember, however, only one person gets the promotion, and your competition may have a map of his or her own. As we noted in the early part of the chapter, power and politics are part of organizational life. To decide not to play is deciding not to be effective. Better to be explicit with a political map than to proceed as if power and poli- tics didn’t matter.

Summary Few employees relish being powerless in their jobs and organizations. People respond differently to the various power bases. Expert and referent power are derived from an individual’s personal qualities. In contrast, coercion, reward, and legitimate power are essentially organizationally granted. Competence especially appears to offer wide appeal, and its use as a power base results in high performance by group members.

An effective manager accepts the political nature of organizations. Some people are more politically astute than others, meaning they are aware of the underlying politics and can manage impressions. Those who are good at play- ing politics can be expected to get higher performance evaluations and hence larger salary increases and more promotions than the politically naïve or inept. The politically astute are also likely to exhibit higher job satisfaction and be bet- ter able to neutralize job stressors.

Implications for Managers ● To maximize your power, increase others’ dependence on you. For

instance, increase your power in relation to your boss by developing a needed knowledge or skill for which there is no ready substitute.

● You will not be alone in attempting to build your power bases. Others, particularly employees and peers, will be seeking to increase your depen- dence on them while you are trying to minimize it and increase their dependence on you.

● Try to avoid putting others in a position where they feel they have no power.

● By assessing behavior in a political framework, you can better predict the actions of others and use that information to formulate political strate- gies that will gain advantages for you and your work unit.

● Consider that employees who have poor political skills or are unwilling to play the politics game generally relate perceived organizational poli- tics to lower job satisfaction and self-reported performance, increased anxiety, and higher turnover. Therefore, if you are adept at organiza- tional politics, help others understand the importance of becoming politically savvy.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 461 29/09/17 4:16 pm

462 PART 3 The Group

Everyone Wants Power POINT

We don’t admit to everything we want. For instance, one psy-chologist found people would seldom admit to wanting money, but they thought everyone else wanted it. They were half right—everyone wants money. And everyone wants power.

Harvard psychologist David McClelland was justifiably famous for his study of underlying motives. McClelland measured people’s moti- vation for power based on how they described pictures (this method is called the Thematic Apperception Test [TAT]). Why didn’t he simply ask people how much they wanted power? Because he believed that many more people really wanted power than would admit it or even consciously realize. And that’s exactly what he found.

Why do we want power? Because it is good for us. It gives us more control over our own lives. It gives us more freedom to do as we wish. There are few things worse in life than feeling helpless and few better than feeling in charge of your destiny. Research shows people with power and status command more respect from others, have higher self-esteem (no surprise there), and enjoy better health than those of less stature.

Take Steve Cohen, founder of SAC Capital Advisors and one of the most powerful men on Wall Street. Worth $11.1 billion, Cohen buys Picassos, lives in a mansion, has white-gloved butlers, and travels the world first class. People will do almost anything to please him—or even to get near him. One writer notes, “Inside his offices, vast for- tunes are won and lost. Careers are made and unmade. Type-A egos are inflated and crushed, sometimes in the space of hours.” All this is bad for Steve Cohen how?

Usually, people who tell you power doesn’t matter are those who have no hope of getting it. Wanting power, like being jealous, can be one of those secrets people just won’t admit to.

COUNTERPOINT

O f course it’s true that some people desire power—and often behave ruthlessly to get it. For most of us, however, power is not high in priority, and for some, it’s actually undesirable. Research shows that most individuals feel uncomfortable when

placed in powerful positions. One study asked individuals, before they began work in a four-person team, to “rank, from 1 [highest] to 4 [lowest], in terms of status and influence within the group, what rank you would like to achieve.” Only about one-third (34 percent) of participants chose the highest rank. In a second study, research- ers focused on employees participating in Amazon’s Mechanical Turk online service. They found that the main reason people wanted power was to earn respect. If they could get respect without gaining power, that was preferred. In a third study, researchers found that individuals desired power only when they had high ability—in other words, when their influence helped their groups.

These studies suggest that we often confuse the desire for power with other things—like the desire to be respected and to help our groups and organizations succeed. In these cases, power is some- thing most of us seek for more benevolent ends—and only when we think it does good.

Another study confirmed that most people want respect from their peers, not power. Cameron Anderson, the author of this research, sums it up nicely: “You don’t have to be rich to be happy, but instead be a valuable contributing member to your groups. What makes a per- son high in status in a group is being engaged, generous with others, and making self-sacrifices for the greater good.”

Oh, and about Steve Cohen . . . you realize he pleaded guilty and paid a $1.2 billion fine for failing to prevent insider trading and then had to shut down SAC, right?

Sources: Based on B. Burrough and B. McLean, “The Hunt for Steve Cohen,” Vanity Fair, June 2013, http://www .vanityfair.com/news/business/2013/06/steve-cohen-insider-trading-case; C. Anderson, R. Willer, G. J. Kilduff, and C. E. Brown, “The Origins of Deference: When Do People Prefer Lower Status?,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 102 (2012): 1077–88; C. Anderson, M. W Kraus, A. D. Galinsky, and D. Keltner, “The Local-Ladder Effect: Social Status and Subjective Well-Being,” Psychological Science 23(7) (2012): 764–71; S. Kennelly, “Happi- ness Is about Respect, Not Riches,” Greater Good, July 13, 2012, http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/ happiness_is_about_respect_not_riches; and P. Lattman and B. Protess, “$1.2 Billion Fine for Hedge Fund SAC Capi- tal in Insider Case,” The New York Times Dealbook, November 4, 2013, http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/11/04/ sac-capital-agrees-to-plead-guilty-to-insider-trading/?_r=0.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 462 29/09/17 4:16 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 463

CHAPTER REVIEW

QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW

13-1 How is leadership different from power? 13-2 What are the similarities and differences among the five bases of power?

13-3 What is the role of dependence in power relationships?

13-4 What power or influence tactics and their contingencies are identified most often?

13-5 What are the causes and consequences of abuse of power?

13-6 How do politics work in organizations? 13-7 What are the causes, consequences, and ethics of political behavior?

APPLICATION AND EMPLOYABILITY Power is an important part of organizational behavior. Who has power (and who doesn’t) shapes which employ- ees make decisions and advance in their careers. There are many tactics that people can use to gain power and to influence those in power. Individuals can also influ- ence others through political behaviors. In this chapter, you used many different skills that are important to your employability while learning about power and politics. You learned critical thinking skills while reading about

the debate over whether most people want power, study- ing research on keeping enemies closer, and learning how to avoid politics. You also applied your knowledge to using impression management techniques in job interviews. In the next section, you will further apply your knowledge and critical thinking skills to addressing office romances, promoting gender diversity on executive boards, and learning the drawbacks to ingratiating one- self to a boss.

MyLab Management Discussion Questions Go to www.pearson.com/mylab/management to complete the problems marked with this icon .

EXPERIENTIAL EXERCISE Comparing Influence Tactics Form groups of three. One person is the influencer, one will be influenced, and one is the observer. These roles can be randomly determined.

To begin, create a deck of cards for the seven tactics to be used in the exercise. These tactics are legitimacy, rational persuasion, inspirational appeals, consultation, exchange, ingratiation, and pressure (all are defined in the chapter). Only the influencer draws cards from the set, and no one else may see what has been drawn.

The influencer draws a card, and quickly formulates and acts out a strategy to use this tactic on the party being influenced. The person being influenced reacts realisti- cally in a back-and-forth exchange over a brief period and states whether or not the tactic was effective. The observer attempts to determine which tactic is being used and which power base (coercive, reward, legitimate, expert, or

referent) would reinforce this tactic. The influencer con- firms or denies the approach used.

Change the roles and cards throughout the rounds. Afterward, discuss the following questions.

Questions

13-8. Based on your observations, which influence situ- ation would probably have resulted in the best outcome for the person doing the influencing?

13-9. Was there a good match between the tactics drawn and the specific role each person took? In other words, was the tactic useful for the influencer given his or her base of power relative to the person being influenced?

13-10. What lessons about power and influence does this exercise teach you?

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 463 29/09/17 4:16 pm

464 PART 3 The Group

ETHICAL DILEMMA Sexual Harassment and Office Romances In this chapter, we talked about sexual harassment and how uneven power dynamics can contribute to sexual harassment. Sexual harassment often occurs because one employee, such as a supervisor, can use his or her control of resources to reward or coerce another employee into sexual behaviors. For example, when a manager asks a female subordinate to go on a date with him, the female subordinate is more likely to say yes because he has con- trol over resources in the organization. If she declines his request, he could retaliate and withhold privileges from her.

Many companies try to prevent sexual harassment by forbidding coworkers from dating. Some have slightly softer rules. They forbid employees from dating their direct supervisors or coworkers in the same department, presumably so that employees cannot use their power to perpetrate sexual harassment. These less stringent poli- cies do not account for informal power that may exist in organizations. An employee can be in a junior posi- tion and still be able withhold access to resources, or this employee can have enough political skill to harm another employee’s career.

On the other hand, it may be impractical to try to enforce a policy against office romances. Modern Ameri- cans spend one-third of their lives working, so it’s likely

that an employee will meet a mate at the office. Accord- ing to a 2015 survey by Careerbuilder.com, over one- third of employees have dated a coworker. Many of these romances involved a power difference as well: 15 percent admitted that they’d dated a supervisor.

Is it worth discouraging office romances? The same sur- vey revealed that almost one-third of office relationships resulted in marriage. And what should you do if Cupid’s arrow strikes you in the breakroom? National workplace expert Lynn Taylor has this advice, “Policy or no policy, love happens. So in the absence of written rules . . . there’s one common barometer: your common sense.”

Questions 13-11. Do you think offices should include rules about

office romances in their sexual harassment poli- cies? Why or why not?

13-12. Is it ever okay for a supervisor to date a subordi- nate? What if someone becomes their romantic partner’s supervisor after the relationship was already initiated?

13-13. Why might 36 percent of the survey respondents say that they hid their romantic relationships from coworkers? How does this relate to what we learned about office gossip in Chapter 9?

Sources: Based on J. Smith, “Eight Questions to Ask Yourself before You Start Dating a Coworker,” Business Insider, May 29, 2016, http://www.businessinsider.com/questions-to-ask- before-you-start-dating-a-coworker-2016-5/#-1; J. Grasz, “Workers Name Their Top Office Romance Deal Breakers in New CareerBuilder Survey,” CareerBuilder, February 11, 2015, http:// www.careerbuilder.com/share/aboutus/pressreleasesdetail.aspx?sd=2%2F11%2F2015&id=pr 868&ed=12%2F31%2F2015.

CASE INCIDENT 1 Should Women Have More Power? We mentioned in this chapter that women tend to have less power in organizations than men. To demonstrate gender differences in power, just look at the gender com- position of executive boards for top-performing com- panies. As of 2015, only 18.8 percent of Fortune 1000 company board seats were occupied by women, and only 20.6 percent of board seats were occupied by women at Fortune 500 companies. This disparity not only highlights the discrimination and the glass ceiling that many women face, it may also be bad for business.

In Chapter 9, we learned that diverse groups may be more creative and innovative, and decision making is more accurate when a group has a variety of perspec- tives. This principle appears to be true when it comes to diverse executive boards. A recent review of 140 studies found that having women on an executive board boosted returns, especially in countries with stronger shareholder

protections. The same review found that having female board members helped companies’ marketplace per- formance in countries with higher gender equality. In addition, boards with greater gender diversity are bet- ter at monitoring company performance and engage in more strategic involvement. Other research suggests that diverse executive boards are not always beneficial. In most circumstances, having women with greater power on a board led to more strategic change in the organiza- tion. However, this is only true when the company is not threatened by low performance.

Many countries are trying to improve their economies by creating quotas that promote more gender-diverse boards. As of 2008, Norway requires women to hold 36 percent of board seats. France passed legislation in 2011 to promote gender-diverse boards. As a result of the law, 48 percent of new directorships were held by women in 2013.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 464 29/09/17 4:16 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 465

Questions 13-14. Why do you think having women with greater

power on a board changes firm performance? 13-15. Do you think using a quota system to promote

gender diversity is a good idea? Why or why not?

13-16. Why do you think some countries have more gender-diverse boards than others?

Sources: Based on M. Farber, “Justin Trudeau Perfectly Sums up Why We Need More Women in Power,” Fortune, April 7, 2017, http://fortune.com/2017/04/07/justin-trudeau-women-in-the-world-summit- 2017/; S. H. Jeong and D. Harrison, “Glass Breaking, Strategy Making, and Value Creating: Meta-Analytic Outcomes of Females as CEOs and TMT members,” Academy of Management Journal, in press; C. Post and C. J. Byron, “Women on Boards and Firm Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Academy of Management Journal 58, no. 5 (2015): 1546–71; T. M. del Carmen, T. L. Miller, and T. M. Trzebiatowski, “The Double-Edged Nature of Board Gender Diversity: Diversity, Firm Performance, and the Power of Women Directors as Predictors of Strategic Change,” Organization Science 25, no. 2 (2014): 609–32; and M. Liautaud, “Breaking Through: Stories and Best Practices from Companies That Help Women Succeed,” Huffington Post, April 29, 2016, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martine-liautaud/stories- and-best-practices-from-companies-that-help-women-succeed_b_9722518.html.

CASE INCIDENT 2 Where Flattery Will Get You One of the various impression management techniques that people use in the workplace is flattering or compli- menting a person. Many people believe that flattery has a positive impact on career prospects. Vicky Oliver, author of 301 Smart Answers to Tough Interview Questions, suggests using flattery to ask for a raise. Oliver advises employees to use other impression management techniques, such as self-promotion (e.g., highlighting your accomplishments) and enhancement (e.g., showing how your work is supe- rior to your peers), but she also suggests complimenting or strategically “flattering” the boss before sitting down to talk about a salary raise.

Does flattery always work? The answer is yes and no. Flat- tery may influence someone in power but only if they see the flattery as sincere. Seeming sincere may be especially diffi- cult, however, because people who have the most power are often the hardest to fool. After all, they have more experi- ence with people flattering them. Recent research suggests that there may be a way to make flattery more effective: Try to convince yourself that you actually like the person you are flattering. In the study, employees who spent more time

considering what they had in common with their boss were more likely to obtain their goal through flattery.

Even if an employee is successful using flattery, it has one major drawback. Another recent study found that executives who flatter their CEOs are more likely to resent their CEO later on. Though CEOs do not require their employees to compliment them, many employees feel demeaned when they go to great lengths to strategically flatter the boss. Employees who complimented their CEOs were also more likely to complain to third parties about their boss. Some even complained to journalists.

Questions 13-17. What are some other consequences of using

flattery at work? Why do these consequences occur? 13-18. The study described in this case also found that

executives resented directing flattery toward female and minority CEOs more than white males. Why do you think this finding is true?

13-19. Are there impression management techniques that are more effective than flattery?

Sources: Based on V. Oliver, “How to Suck Up to Your Boss and Get a Raise,” Fortune, January 9, 2017, http://fortune.com/2017/01/09/pay-raise-career-advice-leadership-self-promotion-boss/; C. Romm, “How to Suck Up Without Being Obvious About It,” NY Magazine, July 5, 2016, http://nymag.com/ scienceofus/2016/07/how-to-suck-up-without-being-obvious-about-it.html; and J. McGregor, “Bosses Be Warned: Your Biggest Kiss-Up Could Be Your Biggest Backstabber,” Daily Herald, April 19, 2017, http://www.dailyherald.com/business/20170416/bosses-be-warned-your-biggest-kiss-up-could- be-your-biggest-backstabber; M. G. McIntyre, “Disgruntlement Won’t Advance Your Career,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 2.

MyLab Management Writing Assignments If your instructor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/mylab/management for auto-graded writing assignments as well as the following assisted-graded writing assignments:

13-20. In Case Incident 1, how would you encourage companies to appoint more female board members in the short term? In the long term?

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 465 29/09/17 4:16 pm

466 PART 3 The Group

ENDNOTES 1 D. A. Buchanan, “You Stab My Back, I’ll Stab Yours: Management Experience and Percep- tions of Organization Political Behavior,” British Journal of Management 19, no. 1 (2008): 49–64. 2 B. Oc, M. R. Bashshur, and C. Moore, “Speak- ing Truth to Power: The Effect of Candid Feed- back on How Individuals with Power Allocate Resources,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 2 (2015): 450–63; and R. E. Sturm and J. Antonakis, “Interpersonal Power: A Review, Critique, and Research Agenda,” Journal of Management 41, no. 1 (2015): 136–63. 3 M. Gongloff, “Steve Cohen, Super-Rich and Secretive Trader, Faces Possible SEC Investiga- tion,” Huffington Post, November 28, 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/ steven-cohen-sac-capital_n_2205544.html. 4 E. Landells and S. L. Albrecht, “Organiza- tional Political Climate: Shared Perceptions about the Building and Use of Power Bases,” Human Resource Management Review 23, no. 4 (2013): 357–65; P. Rylander, “Coaches’ Bases of Power: Developing Some Initial Knowledge of Athletes’ Compliance with Coaches in Team Sports,” Journal of Applied Sport Psychol- ogy 27, no. 1 (2015): 110–21; and G. Yukl, “Use Power Effectively,” in E. A. Locke (ed.), Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004): 242–47. 5 H. Lian, D. J. Brown, D. L. Ferris, L. H. Liang, L. M. Keeping, and R. Morrison, “Abusive Supervision and Retaliation: A Self- Control Framework,” Academy of Management Journal 57, no. 1 (2014): 116–39. 6 E. A. Ward, “Social Power Bases of Managers: Emergence of a New Factor,” Journal of Social Psychology (February 2001): 144–47; and J. French and B. Raven, “The Bases of Social Power,” in D. Cartwright (ed.), Studies in Social Power (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1959): 150–67. 7 French and Raven, “The Bases of Social Power”; and S. R. Giessner and T. W. Schubert, “High in the Hierarchy: How Vertical Location and Judgments of Leaders’ Power Are Interrelated,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 104, no. 1 (2007): 30–44; Ward, “Social Power Bases of Managers.” 8 M. Van Djike and M. Poppe, “Striving for Personal Power as a Basis for Social Power Dynamics,” European Journal of Social Psychology 27, no. 1 (2006): 537–56. 9 French and Raven, “The Bases of Social Power.” 10 Ibid. 11 J. D. Kudisch, M. L. Poteet, G. H. Dobbins, M. C. Rush, and J. A. Russell, “Expert Power, Referent Power, and Charisma: Toward the

Resolution of a Theoretical Debate,” Journal of Business and Psychology 10, no. 1 (1995): 177–95. 12 S. Perman, “Translation Advertising: Where Shop Meets Hip Hop,” Time, August 30, 2010, http://content.time.com/time/magazine/ article/0,9171,2011574,00.html. 13 Sturm and Antonakis, “Interpersonal Power.” 14 M. C. J. Caniels and A. Roeleveld, “Power and Dependence Perspectives on Outsourc- ing Decisions,” European Management Journal 27, no. 6 (2009): 402–17; R.-J. Bryan, D. Kim, and R. S. Sinkovics, “Drivers and Performance Outcomes of Supplier Innovation Generation in Customer-Supplier Relationships: The Role of Power-Dependence,” Decision Sciences 43, no. 6 (2012): 1003–38; and R. M. Emerson, “Power-Dependence Relations,” American Sociological Review 27, no. 1 (1962): 31–40. 15 N. Foulkes, “Tractor Boy,” High Life (Octo- ber 2002): 90. 16 R. S. Burt, M. Kilduff, and S. Tasselli, “Social Network Analysis: Foundations and Frontiers on Advantage,” Annual Review of Psychology 64 (2013): 527–47; M. A. Carpenter, M. Li, and H. Jiang, “Social Network Research in Orga- nizational Contexts: A Systematic Review of Methodological Issues and Choices,” Journal of Management (July 1, 2012): 1328–61; and M. Kilduff and D. J. Brass, “Organizational Social Network Research: Core Ideas and Key Debates.” Academy of Management Annals (January 1, 2010): 317–57. 17 B. L. Aven, “The Paradox of Corrupt Net- works: An Analysis of Organizational Crime at Enron,” Organization Science 26, no. 4 (2015): 980–96. 18 J. Gehman, L. K. Treviño, and R. Garud, “Values Work: A Process Study of the Emer- gence and Performance of Organizational Val- ues Practices,” Academy of Management Journal (February 1, 2013): 84–112. 19 J. Battilana and T. Casciaro, “Change Agents, Networks, and Institutions: A Con- tingency Theory of Organizational Change,” Academy of Management Journal (April 1, 2012): 381–98. 20 S. M. Soltis, F. Agneessens, Z. Sasovova, and G. Labianca, “A Social Network Perspective on Turnover Intentions: The Role of Distributive Justice and Social Support,” Human Resource Management (July 1, 2013): 561–84. 21 R. Kaše, Z. King, and D. Minbaeva, “Using Social Network Research in HRM: Scratching the Surface of a Fundamental Basis of HRM,” Human Resource Management (July 1, 2013): 473–83; and R. Cross and L. Prusak, “The People Who Make Organizations

Go—or Stop,” Harvard Business Review (June 2002): https://hbr.org/2002/06/ the-people-who-make-organizations-go-or-stop. 22 See, for example, D. M. Cable and T. A. Judge, “Managers’ Upward Influence Tactic Strategies: The Roll of Manager Personality and Supervisor Leadership Style,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 24, no. 2 (2003): 197–214; M. P. M. Chong, “Influence Behav- iors and Organizational Commitment: A Com- parative Study,” Leadership and Organization Development Journal 35, no. 1 (2014): 54–78; and G. Blickle, “Influence Tactics Used by Subordinates: An Empirical Analysis of the Kipnis and Schmidt Subscales,” Psychological Reports (February 2000): 143–54. 23 G. R. Ferris, W. A. Hochwarter, C. Douglas, F. R. Blass, R. W. Kolodinksy, and D. C. Tread- way, “Social Influence Processes in Organiza- tions and Human Resource Systems,” in G. R. Ferris and J. J. Martocchio (eds.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, vol. 21 (Oxford, UK: JAI Press/Elsevier, 2003): 65–127; C. A. Higgins, T. A. Judge, and G. R. Ferris, “Influence Tactics and Work Out- comes: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Organiza- tional Behavior (March 2003): 89–106; and M. Uhl-Bien, R. E. Riggio, K. B. Lowe, and M. K. Carsten. “Followership Theory: A Review and Research Agenda,” The Leadership Quarterly (February 2014): 83–104. 24 Chong, “Influence Behaviors and Organiza- tional Commitment.” 25 R. E. Petty and P. Briñol, “Persuasion: From Single to Multiple to Metacognitive Pro- cesses,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 3, no. 2 (2008): 137–47. 26 J. Badal, “Getting a Raise from the Boss,” The Wall Street Journal, July 8, 2006, B1, B5. 27 Chong, “Influence Behaviors and Organiza- tional Commitment.” 28 Ibid. 29 O. Epitropaki and R. Martin, “Transformational-Transactional Leadership and Upward Influence: The Role of Relative Leader-Member Exchanges (RLMX) and Per- ceived Organizational Support (POS), Leader- ship Quarterly 24, no. 2 (2013): 299–315. 30 A. W. Kruglanski, A. Pierro, and E. T. Higgins, “Regulatory Mode and Preferred Leadership Styles: How Fit Increases Job Satis- faction,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology 29, no. 2 (2007): 137–49; and A. Pierro, L. Cicero, and B. H. Raven, “Motivated Compliance with Bases of Social Power,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 38, no. 7 (2008): 1921–44. 31 P. P. Fu and G. Yukl, “Perceived Effective- ness of Influence Tactics in the United States and China,” Leadership Quarterly (Summer

13-21. Based on the chapter discussion and Case Incident 2, what are some ways employees can make sure that they use impression management techniques effectively?

13-22. MyLab Management only—additional assisted-graded writing assignment.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 466 29/09/17 4:16 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 467

2000): 251–66; O. Branzei, “Cultural Explana- tions of Individual Preferences for Influence Tactics in Cross-Cultural Encounters,” Inter- national Journal of Cross Cultural Management (August 2002): 203–18; G. Yukl, P. P. Fu, and R. McDonald, “Cross-Cultural Differ- ences in Perceived Effectiveness of Influence Tactics for Initiating or Resisting Change,” Applied Psychology: An International Review (January 2003): 66–82; P. P. Fu, T. K. Peng, J. C. Kennedy, and G. Yukl, “Examining the Preferences of Influence Tactics in Chinese Societies: A Comparison of Chinese Managers in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Mainland China,” Organizational Dynamics 33, no. 1 (2004): 32–46; and S. Aslani, J. Ramirez-Marin, J. Brett, J. Yao, Z. Semnani-Azad, Z.-X. Zhang, . . . and W. Adair, “Dignity, Face, and Honor Cultures: A Study of Negotiation Strategy and Outcomes in Three Cultures,” Journal of Orga- nizational Behavior 37, no. 8 (2016): 1178–201. 32 C. J. Torelli and S. Shavitt, “Culture and Concepts of Power,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 99, no. 4 (2010): 703–23. 33 Fu and Yukl, “Perceived Effectiveness of Influence Tactics in the United States and China.” 34 T. P. Munyon, J. K. Summers, K. M. Thomp- son, and G. R. Ferris, “Political Skill and Work Outcomes: A Theoretical Extension, Meta- Analytic Investigation, and Agenda for the Future,” Personnel Psychology 68, no. 1 (2015): 143–84; G. R. Ferris, D. C. Treadway, P. L. Per- rewé, R. L. Brouer, C. Douglas, and S. Lux, “Political Skill in Organizations,” Journal of Management (June 2007): 290–320; K. J. Har- ris, K. M. Kacmar, S. Zivnuska, and J. D. Shaw, “The Impact of Political Skill on Impression Management Effectiveness,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 1 (2007): 278–85; W. A. Hochwarter, G. R. Ferris, M. B. Gavin, P. L. Perrewé, A. T. Hall, and D. D. Frink, “Political Skill as Neutralizer of Felt Accountability–Job Tension Effects on Job Performance Ratings: A Longitudinal Investigation,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 102 (2007): 226–39; D. C. Treadway, G. R. Ferris, A. B. Duke, G. L. Adams, and J. B. Tatcher, “The Moderating Role of Subordinate Political Skill on Supervisors’ Impressions of Subordinate Ingratiation and Ratings of Sub- ordinate Interpersonal Facilitation,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 3 (2007): 848–55; and Z. E. Zhou, L. Yang, and P. E. Spector, “Political Skill: A Proactive Inhibitor of Work- place Aggression Exposure and an Active Buffer of the Aggression-Strain Relationship,” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 20, no. 4 (2015): 405–19. 35 J. J. Dahling and B. G. Whitaker, “When Can Feedback-Seeking Behavior Result in a Better Performance Rating? Investigating the Moderating Role of Political Skill,” Human Performance 29, no. 2 (2016): 73–88. 36 M. C. Andrews, K. M. Kacmar, and K. J. Har- ris, “Got Political Skill? The Impact of Justice

on the Importance of Political Skills for Job Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 6 (2009): 1427–37. 37 C. Anderson, S. E. Spataro, and F. J. Flynn, “Personality and Organizational Culture as Determinants of Influence,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 3 (2008): 702–10. 38 Y. Cho and N. J. Fast, “Power, Defensive Denigration, and the Assuaging Effect of Gratitude Expression,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48 (2012): 778–82. 39 M. Pitesa and S. Thau, “Masters of the Universe: How Power and Accountability Influence Self-Serving Decisions under Moral Hazard,” Journal of Applied Psychology 98 (2013): 550–58; N. J. Fast, N. Sivanathan, D. D. Mayer, and A. D. Galinsky, “Power and Overconfident Decision-Making,” Organiza- tional Behavior and Human Decision Processes 117 (2012): 249–60; and M. J. Williams, “Serv- ing the Self from the Seat of Power: Goals and Threats Predict Leaders’ Self-Interested Behavior,” Journal of Management 40 (2014): 1365–95. 40 A. Grant, “Yes, Power Corrupts, but Power Also Reveals,” Government Executive, May 23, 2013, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam- grant/yes-power-corrupts-but-po_b_3085291 .html. 41 J. K. Maner, M. T. Gaillot, A. J. Menzel, and J. W. Kunstman, “Dispositional Anxiety Blocks the Psychological Effects of Power,” Personal- ity and Social Psychology Bulletin 38 (2012): 1383–95. 42 N. J. Fast, N. Halevy, and A. D. Galinsky, “The Destructive Nature of Power without Sta- tus,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48 (2012): 391–94. 43 T. Seppälä, J. Lipponen, A. Bardi, and A. Pirttilä-Backman, “Change-Oriented Organi- zational Citizenship Behaviour: An Interactive Product of Openness to Change Values, Work Unit Identification, and Sense of Power,” Jour- nal of Occupational and Organizational Psychol- ogy 85 (2012): 136–55. 44 K. A. DeCelles, D. S. DeRue, J. D. Margolis, and T. L. Ceranic, “Does Power Corrupt or Enable? When and Why Power Facilitates Self- Interested Behavior,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy 97 (2012): 681–89. 45 “Facts about Sexual Harassment,” The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-sex.html, accessed June 19, 2015. 46 F. Ali and R. Kramar, “An Exploratory Study of Sexual Harassment in Pakistani Organiza- tions,” Asia Pacific Journal of Management 32, no. 1 (2014): 229–49. 47 Ibid. 48 Workplace Sexual Harassment Statis- tics, Association of Women for Action and Research, 2015, http://www.aware.org.sg/ati/ wsh-site/14-statistics/. 49 R. Ilies, N. Hauserman, S. Schwochau, and J. Stibal, “Reported Incidence Rates of Work-Related Sexual Harassment in the

United States: Using Meta-Analysis to Explain Reported Rate Disparities,” Personnel Psychology (Fall 2003): 607–31; and G. Langer, “One in Four U.S. Women Reports Workplace Harass- ment,” ABC News, November 16, 2011, http:// abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/ one-in-four-u-s-women-reports-workplace- harassment/. 50 “Sexual Harassment Charges,” Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, from www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/statistics/, accessed August 20, 2015. 51 B. Popken, “Report: 80% of Waitresses Report Being Sexually Harassed,” USA Today, October 7, 2014, http://www.today.com/ money/report-80-waitresses-report-being- sexually-harassed-2D80199724. 52 L. M. Cortina and S. A. Wasti, “Profiles in Coping: Responses to Sexual Harassment across Persons, Organizations, and Cultures,” Journal of Applied Psychology (February 2005): 182–92; K. Jiang, Y. Hong, P. F. McKay, D. R. Avery, D. C. Wilson, and S. D. Volpone, “Retaining Employees through Anti-Sexual Harassment Practices: Exploring the Medi- ating Role of Psychological Distress and Employee Engagement,” Human Resource Management 54, no. 1 (2015): 1–21; and J. W. Kunstman, “Sexual Overperception: Power, Mating Motives, and Biases in Social Judg- ment,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- ogy 100, no. 2 (2011): 282–94. 53 F. Krings and S. Facchin, “Organizational Justice and Men’s Likelihood to Sexually Harass: The Moderating Role of Sexism and Personality,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 2 (2009): 501–10. 54 G. R. Ferris, D. C. Treadway, R. W. Kolokin- sky, W. A. Hochwarter, C. J. Kacmar, and D. D. Frink, “Development and Validation of the Political Skill Inventory,” Journal of Manage- ment (February 2005): 126–52. 55 A. Pullen and C. Rhodes, “Corporeal Ethics and the Politics of Resistance in Organiza- tions,” Organization 21, no. 6 (2014): 782–96. 56 G. R. Ferris and W. A. Hochwarter, “Orga- nizational Politics,” in S. Zedeck (ed.), APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, vol. 3 (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2011): 435–59. 57 D. A. Buchanan, “You Stab My Back, I’ll Stab Yours: Management Experience and Per- ceptions of Organization Political Behavior,” British Journal of Management 19, no. 1 (2008): 49–64. 58 J. Pfeffer, Power: Why Some People Have It— And Others Don’t (New York: Harper Collins, 2010). 59 S. M. Rioux and L. A. Penner, “The Causes of Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Motivational Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psy- chology (December 2001): 1306–14; M. A. Finkelstein and L. A. Penner, “Predicting Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Inte- grating the Functional and Role Identity Approaches,” Social Behavior & Personality 32,

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 467 29/09/17 4:16 pm

468 PART 3 The Group

no. 4 (2004): 383–98; and J. Schwarzwald, M. Koslowsky, and M. Allouf, “Group Member- ship, Status, and Social Power Preference,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 35, no. 3 (2005): 644–65. 60 See, for example, J. Walter, F. W. Keller- mans, and C. Lechner, “Decision Making within and between Organizations: Rationality, Politics, and Alliance Performance,” Journal of Management 38, no. 5 (2012): 1582–610. 61 G. R. Ferris, D. C. Treadway, P. L. Perrewe, R. L. Grouer, C. Douglas, and S. Lux, “Politi- cal Skill in Organizations,” Journal of Manage- ment 33 (2007): 290–320. 62 J. Shi, R. E. Johnson, Y. Liu, and M. Wang, “Linking Subordinate Political Skill to Super- visor Dependence and Reward Recommenda- tions: A Moderated Mediation Model,” Journal of Applied Psychology 98 (2013): 374–84. 63 W. A. Gentry, D. C. Gimore, M. L. Shuffler, and J. B. Leslie, “Political Skill as an Indica- tor of Promotability among Multiple Rater Sources,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 33 (2012): 89–104; I. Kapoutsis, A. Paplexandris, A. Nikolopoulous, W. A. Hochwarter, and G. R. Ferris, “Politics Perceptions as a Moderator of the Political Skill-Job Performance Relation- ship: A Two-Study, Cross-National, Construc- tive Replication,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 78 (2011): 123–35. 64 M. Abbas, U. Raja, W. Darr, and D. Bouck- enooghe, “Combined Effects of Perceived Politics and Psychological Capital on Job Satisfaction, Turnover Intentions, and Per- formance,” Journal of Management 40, no. 7 (2014): 1813–30; and C. C. Rosen, D. L. Fer- ris, D. J. Brown, and W.-W. Yen, “Relationships among Perceptions of Organizational Politics (POPs), Work Motivation, and Salesperson Performance,” Journal of Management and Organization 21, no. 2 (2015): 203–16. 65 See, for example, M. D. Laird, P. Harvey, and J. Lancaster, “Accountability, Entitle- ment, Tenure, and Satisfaction in Generation Y,” Journal of Managerial Psychology 30, no. 1 (2015): 87–100; J. M. L. Poon, “Situational Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational Politics Perceptions,” Journal of Managerial Psychology 18, no. 2 (2003): 138–55; and K. L. Zellars, W. A. Hochwarter, S. E. Lanivich, P. L. Perrewe, and G. R. Ferris, “Accountability for Others, Perceived Resources, and Well Being: Convergent Restricted Non-Linear Results in Two Samples,” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 84, no. 1 (2011): 95–115. 66 J. Walter, F. W. Kellermanns, and C. Lech- ner, “Decision Making within and between Organizations: Rationality, Politics, and Alli- ance Performance,” Journal of Management 38 (2012): 1582–610. 67 W. A. Hochwarter, C. Kiewitz, S. L. Castro, P. L. Perrewe, and G. R. Ferris, “Positive Affectiv- ity and Collective Efficacy as Moderators of the Relationship between Perceived Politics and Job Satisfaction,” Journal of Applied Social

Psychology (May 2003): 1009–35; C. C. Rosen, P. E. Levy, and R. J. Hall, “Placing Percep- tions of Politics in the Context of Feedback Environment, Employee Attitudes, and Job Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 1 (2006): 211–30; and Abbas, Raja, Darr, and Bouckenooghe, “Combined Effects of Perceived Politics and Psychological Capital on Job Satisfaction, Turnover Intentions, and Performance.” 68 S. Aryee, Z. Chen, and P. S. Budhwar, “Exchange Fairness and Employee Perfor- mance: An Examination of the Relationship between Organizational Politics and Pro- cedural Justice,” Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes (May 2004): 1–14. 69 C. Kiewitz, W. A. Hochwarter, G. R. Ferris, and S. L. Castro, “The Role of Psychological Climate in Neutralizing the Effects of Orga- nizational Politics on Work Outcomes,” Jour- nal of Applied Social Psychology (June 2002): 1189–207; M. C. Andrews, L. A. Witt, and K. M. Kacmar, “The Interactive Effects of Orga- nizational Politics and Exchange Ideology on Manager Ratings of Retention,” Journal of Vocational Behavior, April 2003, 357–69; and C. Chang, C. C. Rosen, and P. E. Levy, “The Relationship between Perceptions of Orga- nizational Politics and Employee Attitudes, Strain, and Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Exami- nation,” Academy of Management Journal 52, no. 4 (2009): 779–801. 70 O. J. Labedo, “Perceptions of Organisa- tional Politics: Examination of the Situational Antecedent and Consequences among Nige- ria’s Extension Personnel,” Applied Psychol- ogy: An International Review 55, no. 2 (2006): 255–81. 71 K. M. Kacmar, M. C. Andrews, K. J. Harris, and B. Tepper, “Ethical Leadership and Sub- ordinate Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Organizational Politics and the Moderating Role of Political Skill,” Journal of Business Ethics 115, no. 1 (2013): 33–44. 72 Ibid. 73 K. M. Kacmar, D. G. Bachrach, K. J. Harris, and S. Zivnuska, “Fostering Good Citizenship through Ethical Leadership: Exploring the Moderating Role of Gender and Organiza- tional Politics,” Journal of Applied Psychology 96 (2011): 633–42. 74 C. Homburg and A. Fuerst, “See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil: A Study of Defensive Organizational Behavior towards Customer Complaints,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 35, no. 4 (2007): 523–36. 75 See, for instance, M. C. Bolino and W. H. Turnley, “More Than One Way to Make an Impression: Exploring Profiles of Impression Management,” Journal of Management 29, no. 2 (2003): 141–60; S. Zivnuska, K. M. Kacmar, L. A. Witt, D. S. Carlson, and V. K. Bratton, “Interactive Effects of Impression Manage- ment and Organizational Politics on Job Per- formance,” Journal of Organizational Behavior (August 2004): 627–40; and M. C. Bolino,

K. M. Kacmar, W. H. Turnley, and J. B. Gil- strap, “A Multi-Level Review of Impression Management Motives and Behaviors,” Journal of Management 34, no. 6 (2008): 1080–109. 76 D. J. Howard and R. A. Kerin, “Individual Differences in the Name Similarity Effect: The Role of Self-Monitoring,” Journal of Individual Differences 35, no. 2 (2014): 111–18. 77 D. H. M. Chng, M. S. Rodgers, E. Shih, and X.-B. Song, “Leaders’ Impression Manage- ment during Organizational Decline: The Roles of Publicity, Image Concerns, and Incentive Compensation,” The Leadership Quarterly 26, no. 2 (2015): 270–85; and L. Uziel, “Life Seems Different with You Around: Differential Shifts in Cognitive Appraisal in the Mere Presence of Others for Neuroticism and Impression Management,” Personality and Individual Differences 73 (2015): 39–43. 78 J. Ham and R. Vonk, “Impressions of Impression Management: Evidence of Sponta- neous Suspicion of Ulterior Motivation,” Jour- nal of Experimental Social Psychology 47, no. 2 (2011): 466–71; and W. M. Bowler, J. R. B. Hal- besleben, and J. R. B. Paul, “If You’re Close with the Leader, You Must Be a Brownnose: The Role of Leader–Member Relationships in Follower, Leader, and Coworker Attribu- tions of Organizational Citizenship Behavior Motives,” Human Resource Management Review 20, no. 4 (2010): 309–16. 79 J. R. B. Halbesleben, W. M. Bowler, M. C. Bolino, and W. H Turnley, “Organizational Concern, Prosocial Values, or Impression Management? How Supervisors Attribute Motives to Organizational Citizenship Behav- ior,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 40, no. 6 (2010): 1450–89. 80 G. Blickle, C. Diekmann, P. B. Schneider, Y. Kalthöfer, and J. K. Summers, “When Mod- esty Wins: Impression Management through Modesty, Political Skill, and Career Success—A Two-Study Investigation,” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology (December 1, 2012): 899–922. 81 L. A. McFarland, A. M. Ryan, and S. D. Kriska, “Impression Management Use and Effectiveness across Assessment Methods,” Journal of Management 29, no. 5 (2003): 641– 61; C. A. Higgins and T. A. Judge, “The Effect of Applicant Influence Tactics on Recruiter Perceptions of Fit and Hiring Recommenda- tions: A Field Study,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy 89, no. 4 (2004): 622–32; and W. C. Tsai, C.-C. Chen, and S. F. Chiu, “Exploring Bound- aries of the Effects of Applicant Impression Management Tactics in Job Interviews,” Jour- nal of Management (February 2005): 108–25. 82 N. Roulin, A. Bangerter, and J. Levashina, “Honest and Deceptive Impression Manage- ment in the Employment Interview: Can It Be Detected and How Does It Impact Evalua- tions?,” Personnel Psychology 68, no. 2 (2015): 395–444. 83 M. R. Barrick, J. A. Shaffer, and S. W. DeGrassi. “What You See May Not Be

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 468 29/09/17 4:16 pm

Power and Politics CHAPTER 13 469

What You Get: Relationships among Self- Presentation Tactics and Ratings of Interview and Job Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 6 (2009): 1394–411. 84 B. Griffin, “The Ability to Identify Criteria: Its Relationship with Social Understanding, Preparation, and Impression Management in Affecting Predictor Performance in a High- Stakes Selection Context,” Human Performance 27, no. 4 (2014): 147–64. 85 E. Molleman, B. Emans, and N. Turus- bekova, “How to Control Self-Promotion among Performance-Oriented Employees: The Roles of Task Clarity and Personalized Respon- sibility,” Personnel Review 41 (2012): 88–105. 86 K. J. Harris, K. M. Kacmar, S. Zivnuska, and J. D. Shaw, “The Impact of Political Skill on Impression Management Effectiveness,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 1 (2007): 278–85; and D. C. Treadway, G. R. Ferris, A. B. Duke, G. L. Adams, and J. B. Thatcher, “The Moderating Role of Subordinate Political Skill

on Supervisors’ Impressions of Subordinate Ingratiation and Ratings of Subordinate Interpersonal Facilitation,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 3 (2007): 848–55. 87 J. D. Westphal and I. Stern, “Flattery Will Get You Everywhere (Especially if You Are a Male Caucasian): How Ingratiation, Board- room Behavior, and Demographic Minority Status Affect Additional Board Appointments of U.S. Companies,” Academy of Management Journal 50, no. 2 (2007): 267–88. 88 Y. Liu, G. R. Ferris, J. Xu, B. A. Weitz, and P. L. Perrewé, “When Ingratiation Backfires: The Role of Political Skill in the Ingratiation- Internship Performance Relationship,” Acad- emy of Management Learning and Education 13 (2014): 569–86. 89 See, for example, E. Vigoda, “Reactions to Organizational Politics: A Cross-Cultural Examination in Israel and Britain,” Human Relations (November 2001): 1483–1518; and Y. Zhu and D. Li, “Negative Spillover Impact

of Perceptions of Organizational Politics on Work-Family Conflict in China,” Social Behavior and Personality 43, no. 5 (2015): 705–14. 90 J. L. T. Leong, M. H. Bond, and P. P. Fu, “Perceived Effectiveness of Influence Strate- gies in the United States and Three Chinese Societies,” International Journal of Cross Cultural Management (May 2006): 101–20. 91 Y. Miyamoto and B. Wilken, “Culturally Contingent Situated Cognition: Influencing Other People Fosters Analytic Perception in the United States but Not in Japan,” Psychologi- cal Science 21, no. 11 (2010): 1616–22. 92 Y. Wang and S. Highhouse, “Different Con- sequences of Supplication and Modesty: Self- Effacing Impression Management Behaviors and Supervisory Perceptions of Subordinate Personality,” Human Performance 29, no. 5 (2016): 394–407. 93 D. Clark, “A Campaign Strategy for Your Career,” Harvard Business Review (November 2012): 131–34.

M13_ROBB9329_18_SE_C13.indd 469 29/09/17 4:16 pm

470

14-1 Describe the three types of conflict and the three loci of conflict.

14-2 Outline the conflict process.

14-3 Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.

14-4 Apply the five steps of the negotia- tion process.

14-5 Show how individual differences influence negotiations.

14-6 Assess the roles and functions of third-party negotiations.

14 Conflict and Negotiation

LEARNING OBJECTIVES After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

So ur

ce : R

on en

Z vu

lla n/

R eu

te rs

/A la

m y

S to

ck P

ho to

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 470 29/09/17 4:25 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 471

BARGAINING CHIPS

What gives someone the ability to negotiate? Power? Money? Relation-ships? Can someone with seemingly no power, little access to the outside world, and almost no economic resources still have the power to bargain? Yes.

Derrick Houston seemed to have nothing to negotiate with. The Missis- sippi inmate was serving a sentence for armed robbery at a state prison in Leakesville, Mississippi, in April 2017. His sentence would last for over two decades. But with such a long sentence, Houston knew he could not live in the inhumane conditions offered by the prison. While state officials claimed that conditions in the prisons were meant to maintain security because of gang activity, many residents of the prison felt they were being subjected to cruel treatment. Many inmates were kept in lockdown for days at a time, despite laws that require at least five hours of recreational activity a week. At the same time, limits on visitors meant that many inmates could rarely see family and friends.

Physical conditions also needed to be improved in the facility. Many of the inmates had serious mental health issues and would throw feces and urine in their cells. This led to unsanitary conditions, including infestations of roaches, rats, spiders, and flies. On top of this, the prison did not have air conditioning, which could be dangerous for inmates when temperatures reached the triple digits in the summer.

Employability Skills Matrix (ESM)

Myth or Science?

Career OBjectives

An Ethical Choice

Point/ Counterpoint

Experiential Exercise

Ethical Dilemma

Case Incident 1

Case Incident 2

Critical Thinking ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Communication ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Collaboration ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Knowledge

Application and Analysis

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Social Responsibility ✓ ✓ ✓

MyLab Management Chapter Warm Up If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/ mylab/management to complete the chapter warm up.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 471 29/09/17 4:25 pm

472 PART 3 The Group

One inmate commented, “If a citizen left their dog or pet in the outside heat of a condemned dog house where [the] temperature is 130 degrees, they would be arrested for animal cruelty and the pet would be taken away. So why should humans be treated worse than animals?” The inmates tried to negotiate by using the only bargaining chip they had: their stomachs. The inmates began refusing to eat, knowing that health problems from starvation would draw press and state officials’ attention. The tactic proved successful. By the end of the month, Houston and the rest of the protesting inmates were transferred to a prison with better conditions.

Wendy, Derrick Houston’s wife, was very relieved. “[We] have been trying to get my husband transferred from Southern Mississippi Correctional Insti- tution (SMCI) for over a year. If we had known a hunger strike would get him transferred, then he should have gotten on it a year ago,” she wrote in an e-mail to a reporter.

A hunger strike may seem extreme, but it is a relatively common strategy when prisoners want to negotiate better conditions. They occur frequently in American prisons. The same month that Houston and many other inmates were striking in Mississippi, hundreds of inmates were also taking part in a hunger strike in Northwest Detention Center in Tacoma, Washington. Inmates at the Washington prison were especially vulnerable because they were undocumented immigrants without the same legal rights as the prison- ers in Mississippi. Like Houston, they complained about conditions as well as incredibly low prison wages that they felt violated antislavery laws.

Around the globe, the same tactic was being used by Palestinian inmates in Israeli prisons. Unlike the strikes in American prisons, the Palestinian hunger strike was especially political in nature. Led by a prominent Pales- tinian figure, Marwan Barghouti, the strike was meant to draw attention to persecution of Palestinian citizens in Israel. Besides leading the hunger strike, Barghouti was also punished for smuggling essays on Palestinian resistance to the New York Times.

Hunger strikes highlight many of the concepts we will cover in this chap- ter. First, they highlight a response to conflict. In the cases above, the con- flicts between inmates and prison officials were dysfunctional. As you will learn from this text, however, some conflict is beneficial, and even neces- sary, because it enhances creativity and drives change in organizations. Second, the negotiation process tended to alleviate the conflict. By using their health as a bargaining tool, inmates in Mississippi were able to gain better conditions. Would the same tactic always be successful in every context? Not necessarily. We will also explain many factors, from emotions to personality, that influence the success of negotiation techniques across situations.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 472 29/09/17 4:25 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 473

Sources: Based on I. Fisher, “Over 1,000 Palestinian Prisoners in Israel Stage Hunger Strike,” New York Times, April 17, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/17/world/ middleeast/ marwan-barghouti-hunger-strike-israel.html; J. Amy, “Mississippi Corrections Says Prison Hunger Strike Over,” The Clarion-Ledger, April 12, 2017, http://www.clarionledger.com/story/ news/2017/04/12/mississippi-prison-hunger-strike/100365860/; J. Mitchell, “Inmates Say They’re On Hunger Strike to Protest Leakesville Prison Conditions,” USA Today, April 4, 2017, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/04/04/hunger-strike-enters-third-day- at-leakesville-prison/100026768/; and S. Bernard, “Detainees Launch New Hunger Strike at Northwest Detention Center,” Seattle Weekly, April 10, 2017, http://www.seattleweekly .com/news/detainees-launch-new-hunger-strike-at-northwest-detention-center/.

A Definition of Conflict There has been no shortage of definitions for the word conflict,1 but common to most is the idea that conflict is a perception. If no one is aware of a conflict, then it is generally agreed no conflict exists. Also needed to begin the conflict process are opposition or incompatibility, and interaction.

We define conflict broadly as a process that begins when one party perceives that another party has affected or is about to negatively affect something the first party cares about. Conflict describes the point in ongoing activity when interaction becomes disagreement. People experience a wide range of conflicts in organizations over an incompatibility of goals, differences in interpretations of facts, disagreements over behavioral expectations, and the like. Our defini- tion covers the full range of conflict levels, from overt and violent acts to subtle forms of disagreement.

There is no consensus over the role of conflict in groups and organizations. In the past, researchers tended to argue about whether conflict was uniformly good or bad. Such simplistic views eventually gave way to approaches recogniz- ing that not all conflicts are the same and that different types of conflict have different effects.2

Contemporary perspectives differentiate types of conflict based on their effects. Functional conflict supports the goals of the group, improves its per- formance, and is thus a constructive form of conflict.3 For example, a debate among members of a work team about the most efficient way to improve pro- duction can be functional if unique points of view are discussed and compared openly. Conflict that hinders group performance is destructive or dysfunctional conflict.4 A highly personal struggle for control in a team that distracts from the task at hand is dysfunctional. Exhibit 14-1 provides an overview depicting the effect of levels of conflict. To understand different types of conflict, we will discuss next the types of conflict and the loci of conflict.

Types of Conflict One means of understanding conflict is to identify the type of disagreement, or what the conflict is about. Is it a disagreement about goals? Is it about peo- ple who just do not get along well with one another? Or is it about the best way to get things done? Although each conflict is unique, researchers have classified conflicts into three categories: task, relationship, or process. Task conflict relates to the content and goals of the work. Relationship conflict focuses on interpersonal relationships. Process conflict is about how the work gets done.5

14-1 Describe the three types of conflict and the three loci of conflict.

conflict A process that begins when one party perceives that another party has nega- tively affected or is about to negatively affect something that the first party cares about.

functional conflict Conflict that supports the goals of the group and improves its performance.

dysfunctional conflict Conflict that hinders group performance.

task conflict Conflict over content and goals of the work.

relationship conflict Conflict based on interpersonal relationships.

process conflict Conflict over how work gets done.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 473 29/09/17 4:25 pm

474 PART 3 The Group

Studies demonstrate that relationship conflicts, at least in work settings, are almost always dysfunctional6 (although they may improve creativity under some circumstances).7 Why? It appears that the friction and interpersonal hostilities inherent in relationship conflicts increase personality clashes and decrease mutual understanding, which hinders the completion of organizational tasks. Of the three types, relationship conflicts also appear to be the most psycho- logically exhausting for individuals.8 This type of conflict can also be very problematic for employees who are new to the organization because newcom- ers rely on coworkers to learn information about the job.9 Because they tend to revolve around personalities, you can see how relationship conflicts can become destructive. After all, we can’t expect to change our coworkers’ person- alities, and we would generally take offense at criticisms directed at who we are as opposed to how we behave.

While scholars agree that relationship conflict is dysfunctional, there is considerably less agreement about whether task and process conflicts are func- tional. Early research suggested that task conflict within groups correlated to higher group performance, but a review of 116 studies found that generalized task conflict was essentially unrelated to group performance. However, there

Conflict and Unit PerformanceExhibit 14-1

A

(Low) (High)Level of Conflict

Un it

Pe rfo

rm an

ce

(High)

B C

Situation

A

B

C

Level of Conflict

Low or

none

Optimal

High

Type of Conflict

Dysfunctional

Functional

Dysfunctional

Unit’s Internal Characteristics

Apathetic Stagnant Nonresponsive to change Lack of new ideas

Viable Self-critical Innovative

Disruptive Chaotic Uncooperative

Unit Performance Outcome

Low

High

Low

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 474 29/09/17 4:25 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 475

were factors of the conflict that could create a relationship between conflict and performance.10 One such factor was whether the conflict included top management or occurred lower in the organization. Task conflict among top management teams was positively associated with performance, whereas con- flict lower in the organization was negatively associated with group perfor- mance, perhaps because people in top positions may not feel as threatened in their organizational roles by conflict. This review also found that it mattered whether other types of conflict were occurring at the same time. If task and relationship conflict occurred together, task conflict was more likely negative, whereas if task conflict occurred by itself, it more likely was positive. Also, some scholars have argued that the strength of conflict is important—if task conflict is very low, people aren’t really engaged or addressing the important issues. If task conflict is too high, however, infighting quickly degenerates into relation- ship conflict. Moderate levels of task conflict may thus be optimal. Supporting this argument, one study in China found that moderate levels of task conflict in the early development stage increased creativity in groups, but high levels decreased team performance.11

The personalities of the teams appear to matter. One study demonstrated that teams of individuals who are, on average, high in openness and emo- tional stability are better able to turn task conflict into increased group per- formance.12 The reason may be that open and emotionally stable teams can put task conflict in perspective and focus on how the variance in ideas can help solve the problem rather than letting it degenerate into relationship conflicts.

What about process conflict? Researchers found that process conflicts are about delegation and roles. Conflicts over delegation often revolve around the perception of some members as shirking, and conflicts over roles can leave some group members feeling marginalized. Thus, process conflicts often become highly personalized and quickly devolve into rela- tionship conflicts. It’s also true, of course, that arguing about how to do something takes time away from actually doing it. We’ve all been part of groups in which the arguments and debates about roles and responsibilities seem to go nowhere.

Loci of Conflict Another way to understand conflict is to consider its locus, or the framework within which the conflict occurs. Here, too, there are three basic types. Dyadic conflict is conflict between two people. Intragroup conflict occurs within a group or team. Intergroup conflict is conflict between groups or teams.13

Nearly all the literature on task, relationship, and process conflict consid- ers intragroup conflict (within the group). That makes sense given that groups and teams often exist only to perform a particular task. However, it doesn’t nec- essarily tell us all we need to know about the context and outcomes of conflict. For example, research has found that for intragroup task conflict to influence performance within the team positively, it is important that the team has a supportive climate in which mistakes aren’t penalized and every team mem- ber “[has] the other’s back.”14 Similarly, the personal needs of group members may determine when task conflict has a positive impact on performance. In a study of Korean work groups, task conflict was beneficial for performance when members were high on the need for achievement.15

But is this concept applicable to the effects of intergroup conflict? Think about, say, the teams in the National Football League (NFL). As we said, for a team to adapt and improve, perhaps a certain amount of intragroup conflict

dyadic conflict Conflict that occurs between two people.

intragroup conflict Conflict that occurs within a group or team.

intergroup conflict Conflict between different groups or teams.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 475 29/09/17 4:25 pm

476 PART 3 The Group

(but not too much) is good for team performance, especially when the team members support one another. But would we care whether members from one NFL team supported members from another team? Probably not. In fact, if groups are competing with one another so that only one team can “win,” inter- team conflict seems almost inevitable. Still, it must be managed. Intense inter- group conflict can be quite stressful to group members and might well affect the way they interact. One study found, for example, that high levels of con- flict between teams caused individuals to focus on complying with norms within their teams.16

It may surprise you that individuals become most important in intergroup conflicts. One study that focused on intergroup conflict found an interplay between an individual’s position within a group and the way that individual managed conflict between groups. Group members who were relatively periph- eral in their own group were better at resolving conflicts between their group and another one. But this happened only when those peripheral members were still accountable to their group.17 Thus, being at the core of your work group does not necessarily make you the best person to manage conflict with other groups.

Another intriguing question about loci is whether conflicts interact with or buffer one another. Assume, for example, that Jia and Marcus are on the same team. What happens if they don’t get along interpersonally (dyadic conflict) and their team also has high task conflict? Progress might be halted. What hap- pens to their team if two other team members, Shawna and Justin, do get along well? The team might still be dysfunctional, or the positive relationship might prevail.

Thus, understanding functional and dysfunctional conflict requires not only that we identify the type of conflict; we also need to know where it occurs. It’s possible that while the concepts of task, relationship, and process conflict are useful in understanding intragroup or even dyadic conflict, they are less useful in explaining the effects of intergroup conflict. But how do we make conflict as productive as possible? A better understanding of the conflict process, dis- cussed next, will provide insight about potential controllable variables.

Under the leadership of George Zimmer, the founder and CEO of Men’s Warehouse (MW) and its advertising spokesperson, the retailer grew into a multimillion-dollar firm with 1,143 stores. After retiring as CEO, Zimmer served as executive chairman of MW’s board until an intragroup con- flict between him and other members resulted in his removal from the board. Source: Patrick Fallon/Bloomberg/Getty Images

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 476 29/09/17 4:25 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 477

The Conflict Process The conflict process has five stages: potential opposition or incompatibil- ity, cognition and personalization, intentions, behavior, and outcomes (see Exhibit 14-2).18

Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility The first stage of conflict is the appearance of conditions—causes or sources— that create opportunities for it to arise. These conditions may not lead directly to conflict, but one of them is necessary if it is to surface. We group the con- ditions into three general categories: communication, structure, and personal variables.

Communication Susan had worked in supply chain management at Bristol- Myers Squibb for three years. She enjoyed her work largely because her man- ager, Harry, was a great boss. Then Harry was promoted and Chuck took his place. Six months later, Susan says her job is frustrating. “Harry and I were on the same wavelength. It’s not that way with Chuck. He tells me something, and I do it. Then he tells me I did it wrong. I think he means one thing but says something else. It’s been like this since the day he arrived. I don’t think a day goes by when he isn’t yelling at me for something. You know, there are some people you just find it easy to communicate with. Well, Chuck isn’t one of those!”

Susan’s comments illustrate that communication can be a source of con- flict.19 Her experience represents the opposing forces that arise from seman- tic difficulties, misunderstandings, and “noise” in the communication channel (see Chapter 11). These factors, along with jargon and insufficient informa- tion, can be barriers to communication and may be potential antecedent con- ditions to conflict. The potential for conflict has also been found to increase with too little or too much communication. Communication is functional up to a point, after which it is possible to overcommunicate, increasing the potential for conflict.

Structure Charlotte is a salesperson and Mercedes is the company credit man- ager at Portland Furniture Mart, a large discount furniture retailer. The women have known each other for years and have much in common: They live two blocks apart, and their oldest daughters attend the same middle school and

14-2 Outline the conflict process. conflict process A process that has five stages: potential opposition or incompatibility, cognition and personalization, intentions, behavior, and outcomes.

The Conflict ProcessExhibit 14-2

Increased group

performance

Decreased group

performance

Overt conflict • Party’s behavior • Other’s reaction

Conflict-handling intentions • Competing • Collaborating • Compromising • Avoiding • Accommodating

Antecedent conditions • Communication • Structure • Personal variables

Perceived conflict

Cognition and personalization

Intentions Behavior OutcomesPotential opposition or incompatibility

Stage II Stage III Stage IV Stage VStage I

Felt conflict

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 477 29/09/17 4:25 pm

478 PART 3 The Group

are best friends. If Charlotte and Mercedes had different jobs, they might be friends, but at work they constantly disagree. Charlotte’s job is to sell furniture, and she does it well. Most of her sales are made on credit. Because Mercedes’s job is to minimize credit losses, she regularly has to turn down the credit appli- cations of Charlotte’s customers. It’s nothing personal between the women; the requirements of their jobs just bring them into conflict.

The conflicts between Charlotte and Mercedes are structural in nature. The term structure in this context includes variables such as the size of the group, degree of specialization in tasks assigned to group members, jurisdictional clar- ity, member–goal compatibility, leadership styles, reward systems, and degree of dependence between groups. The larger the group and the more special- ized its activities, the greater the likelihood of conflict. Tenure and conflict are inversely related, meaning that the longer a person stays with an organization, the less likely conflict becomes. Therefore, the potential for conflict is greatest when group members are younger and when turnover is high.

Personal Variables Have you ever met someone you immediately disliked? Perhaps you disagreed with most of his opinions. Even insignificant character- istics—his voice, facial expressions, or word choice—may have annoyed you. Sometimes our impressions are negative. When you have to work with people you don’t like, the potential for conflict arises.

Our last category of potential sources of conflict is personal variables, which include personality, emotions, and values. People high in the personality traits of disagreeableness, neuroticism, or self-monitoring (see Chapter 5) are prone to tangle with other people more often—and to react poorly when conflicts occur.20 Emotions can cause conflict even when they are not directed at oth- ers. An employee who shows up to work irate from her hectic morning com- mute may carry that anger into her workday, which can result in a tension-filled meeting.21 Differences in preferences and values can generate higher levels of conflict. For example, a study in Korea found that when group members didn’t agree about their desired achievement levels, there was more task conflict; when group members didn’t agree about their desired interpersonal closeness, there was more relationship conflict; and when group members didn’t have similar desires for power, there was more conflict over status.22

Stage II: Cognition and Personalization If the conditions cited in Stage I negatively affect something one party cares about, then the potential for opposition or incompatibility becomes actualized in the second stage.

As we noted in our definition of conflict, one or more of the parties must be aware that antecedent conditions exist. However, just because a disagreement is a perceived conflict does not mean it is personalized. It is at the felt conflict level, when individuals become emotionally involved, that they experience anx- iety, tension, frustration, or hostility.

Stage II is important because it’s where conflict issues tend to be defined, where the parties decide what the conflict is about.23 The definition of conflict is important because it delineates the set of possible settlements. Most evidence suggests that people tend to default to cooperative strategies in interpersonal interactions unless there is a clear signal that they are faced with a competi- tive person. However, if our salary disagreement is a zero-sum situation (the increase in pay you want means there will be that much less in the raise pool for me), I am going to be far less willing to compromise than if I can frame the conflict as a potential win–win situation (the dollars in the salary pool might be increased so both of us could get the added pay we want).

perceived conflict Awareness by one or more parties of the existence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise.

felt conflict Emotional involvement in a conflict that creates anxiety, tenseness, frustration, or hostility.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 478 29/09/17 4:25 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 479

Second, emotions play a major role in shaping perceptions.24 Negative emo- tions allow us to oversimplify issues, lose trust, and put negative interpreta- tions on the other party’s behavior.25 In contrast, positive feelings increase our tendency to see potential relationships among elements of a problem, take a broader view of the situation, and develop innovative solutions.26

Stage III: Intentions Intentions intervene between people’s perceptions and emotions, and their overt behavior. They are decisions to act in a given way.27

Intentions are a distinct stage because we have to infer the other’s intent to know how to respond to behavior. Many conflicts escalate simply because one party attributes the wrong intentions to the other. There is slippage between intentions and behavior, so behavior does not always reflect a person’s inten- tions accurately.

We can also think of conflict-handling intentions as falling along two dimen- sions. These two dimensions—assertiveness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy his or her own concerns) and cooperativeness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy the other party’s concerns)—can help us identify five conflict-handling intentions: competing (assertive and uncoopera- tive), collaborating (assertive and cooperative), avoiding (unassertive and unco- operative), accommodating (unassertive and cooperative), and compromising (midrange on both assertiveness and cooperativeness).28

Competing When one person seeks to satisfy his or her own interests regard- less of the impact on the other parties in the conflict, that person is competing. We are more apt to compete when resources are scarce.

Collaborating When parties in conflict each desire to fully satisfy the concerns of all parties, there is cooperation and a search for a mutually beneficial out- come. In collaborating, parties intend to solve a problem by clarifying differ- ences rather than by accommodating various points of view. If you attempt to find a win–win solution that allows both parties’ goals to be completely achieved, that’s collaborating.

Avoiding A person may recognize that a conflict exists and want to withdraw from or suppress it. Examples of avoiding include trying to ignore a conflict and keeping away from others with whom you disagree.

Accommodating A party who seeks to appease an opponent may be willing to place the opponent’s interests above his or her own, sacrificing to maintain the relationship. We refer to this intention as accommodating. Supporting some- one else’s opinion despite your reservations about it, for example, is accom- modating.

Compromising In compromising, there is no winner or loser. Rather, there is a willingness to rationalize the object of the conflict and accept a solution with incomplete satisfaction of both parties’ concerns. The distinguishing character- istic of compromising therefore is that each party intends to give up something.

Stage IV: Behavior When most people think of conflict, they tend to focus on Stage IV because this is where conflicts become visible. The behavior stage includes statements, actions, and reactions made by conflicting parties, usually as overt attempts

intentions Decisions to act in a given way.

competing A desire to satisfy one’s interests, regardless of the impact on the other party to the conflict.

collaborating A situation in which the parties to a conflict each desire to satisfy fully the concerns of all parties.

avoiding The desire to withdraw from or suppress a conflict.

accommodating The willingness of one party in a conflict to place the opponent’s interests above his or her own.

compromising A situation in which each party to a conflict is willing to give up something to resolve the conflict.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 479 29/09/17 4:25 pm

480 PART 3 The Group

to implement their own intentions. As a result of miscalculations or unskilled enactments, overt behaviors sometimes deviate from original intentions.29

Stage IV is a dynamic process of interaction. For example, you make a demand on me, I respond by arguing, you threaten me, I threaten you back, and so on. Exhibit 14-3 provides a way of visualizing conflict behavior. All con- flicts exist somewhere along this continuum. At the lower end are conflicts characterized by subtle, indirect, and highly controlled forms of tension, such as a student challenging a point the instructor has made. Conflict intensities escalate as they move upward along the continuum until they become highly destructive. Strikes, riots, and wars clearly fall in this upper range. Conflicts that reach the upper range of the continuum are almost always dysfunctional. Func- tional conflicts are typically confined to the lower range of the continuum.

Intentions that are brought into a conflict are eventually translated into behaviors. Competing brings out active attempts to contend with team members, and more individual effort to achieve ends without working together. Collaborat- ing creates investigation of multiple solutions with other members of the team and trying to find a solution that satisfies all parties as much as possible. Avoid- ance is seen in behavior like refusals to discuss issues and reductions in effort toward group goals. People who accommodate put their relationships ahead of the issues in the conflict, deferring to others’ opinions and sometimes acting as a subgroup with them. When people compromise, they both expect to (and do) sacrifice parts of their interests, hoping that if everyone does the same, an agreement will emerge.

A review that examined the effects of the four sets of behaviors across mul- tiple studies found that openness and collaborating were both associated with superior group performance, whereas avoiding and competing strategies were associated with significantly worse group performance.30 These effects were nearly as large as the effects of relationship conflict. Collaboration may be especially effective for tasks that require innovation, but it can lead to mistrust and conflict when groups are splintered into smaller groups of two or three based on task.31 Individuals who have been assigned power tend to have a more difficult time using collaborative strategies.32 This further demonstrates that it is not just the existence of conflict or even the type of conflict that creates prob- lems but rather the ways people respond to conflict and manage the process once conflicts arise.

If a conflict is dysfunctional, what can the parties do to deescalate it? Or, conversely, what options exist if conflict is too low to be functional and

Conflict-Intensity ContinuumExhibit 14-3

Annihilatory conflict

Overt efforts to destroy the other party

Aggressive physical attacks

Threats and ultimatums

Assertive verbal attacks

Overt questioning or challenging of others

Minor disagreements or misunderstandings

No conflict

Sources: Based on S. P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974): 93–97; and F. Glasi, “The Process of Conflict Escalation and the Roles of Third Parties,” in G. B. J. Bomers and R. Peterson (eds.), Conflict Management and Industrial Relations (Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff, 1982): 119–40.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 480 29/09/17 4:25 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 481

needs to be increased? This brings us to techniques of conflict management. Exhibit 14-4 lists the major resolution and stimulation techniques that allow managers to control conflict levels. We have already described several as con- flict-handling intentions. Under ideal conditions, a person’s intentions should translate into comparable behaviors.

Stage V: Outcomes The action–reaction interplay between conflicting parties creates conse- quences. As our model demonstrates (see Exhibit 14-1), these outcomes may be functional if the conflict improves the group’s performance, or dysfunc- tional if it hinders performance.

Functional Outcomes How might conflict act as a force to increase group per- formance? It is hard to visualize a situation in which open or violent aggression could be functional. But it’s possible to see how low or moderate levels of con- flict could improve group effectiveness. Note that all our examples focus on task and process conflicts and exclude the relationship variety.

Conflict is constructive when it improves the quality of decisions, stimulates creativity and innovation, encourages interest and curiosity among group mem- bers, provides the medium for problems to be aired and tensions released, and fosters self-evaluation and change. Mild conflicts also may generate energizing emotions so members of groups become more active, energized, and engaged in their work.33

conflict management The use of resolution and stimulation techniques to achieve the desired level of conflict.

Conflict Management TechniquesExhibit 14-4

Conflict-Resolution Techniques

Problem solving Meeting face to face for the purpose of identifying the problem and resolving it through open discussion.

Superordinate goals Creating a shared goal that cannot be attained without the cooperation of each of the conflicting parties.

Expansion of resources Expanding the supply of a scarce resource (for example, money, promotion, opportunities, office space).

Avoidance Withdrawing from or suppressing the conflict.

Smoothing Playing down differences while emphasizing common interests between the conflicting parties.

Compromise Having each party to the conflict give up something of value.

Authoritative command Letting management use its formal authority to resolve the conflict and then communicating its desires to the parties involved.

Altering the human variable Using behavioral change techniques such as human relations training to alter attitudes and behaviors that cause conflict.

Altering the structural variables Changing the formal organization structure and the interaction patterns of conflicting parties through job redesign, transfers, creation of coordinating positions, and the like.

Conflict-Stimulation Techniques

Communication Using ambiguous or threatening messages to increase conflict levels.

Bringing in outsiders Adding employees to a group whose backgrounds, values, attitudes, or managerial styles differ from those of present members.

Restructuring the organization Realigning work groups, altering rules and regulations, increasing interdependence, and making similar structural changes to disrupt the status quo.

Appointing a devil’s advocate Designating a critic to purposely argue against the majority positions held by the group.

Source: Based on S. P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974): 59–89.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 481 29/09/17 4:25 pm

482 PART 3 The Group

Dysfunctional Outcomes The destructive consequences of conflict on the performance of a group or an organization are generally well known: Uncon- trolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve common ties and eventually leads to the destruction of the group. And, of course, a substantial body of literature documents how dysfunctional conflicts can reduce group effectiveness.34 Among the undesirable consequences are poor communica- tion, reductions in group cohesiveness, and subordination of group goals to the primacy of infighting among members. All forms of conflict—even the functional varieties—appear to reduce group member satisfaction and trust.35 When active discussions turn into open conflicts between members, information sharing between members decreases significantly.36 At the extreme, conflict can bring group functioning to a halt and threaten the group’s survival.

Managing Functional Conflict If managers recognize that conflict can be bene- ficial in some situations, what can they do to manage conflict effectively in their organizations? In addition to knowing the principles of conflict motivation we just discussed, there are some practical guidelines for managers.

First, one of the keys to minimizing counterproductive conflicts is recogniz- ing when there really is a disagreement. Many apparent conflicts are due to people using different verbiage to discuss the same general course of action. For example, someone in marketing might focus on “distribution problems,” while someone from operations will talk about “supply chain management” to describe essentially the same issue. Successful conflict management recognizes these different approaches and attempts to resolve them by encouraging open, frank discussion focused on interests rather than issues.

IBM encourages employees to engage in functional conflict that results in innovations, such as the Watson supercomputer designed to learn through the same process human brains use. For innovation to flourish, IBM relies on the creative tension from employees’ different ideas and skills and provides a work environ- ment that promotes risk taking and outside-the-box thinking. Source: Jon Simon/Feature Photo Service/Newscom

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 482 29/09/17 4:25 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 483

Another approach is to have opposing groups pick parts of the solution that are most important to them and then focus on how each side can get its top needs satisfied. Neither side may get exactly what it wants, but each side will achieve the most important parts of its agenda.37

Third, groups that resolve conflicts successfully discuss differences of opin- ion openly and are prepared to manage conflict when it arises.38 The most dis- ruptive conflicts are those that are never addressed directly. An open discussion makes it much easier to develop a shared perception of the problems at hand; it also allows groups to work toward a mutually acceptable solution.

Fourth, managers need to emphasize shared interests in resolving conflicts so groups that disagree with one another don’t become too entrenched in their points of view and start to take the conflicts personally. Groups with coopera- tive conflict styles and a strong underlying identification with the overall group goals are more effective than groups with a competitive style.39

Differences across countries in conflict resolution strategies may be based on collectivistic tendencies and motives.40 Collectivist cultures see people as deeply embedded in social situations, whereas individualist cultures see them as autonomous. As a result, collectivists are more likely to seek to preserve rela- tionships and promote the good of the group as a whole. They avoid the direct expression of conflict, preferring indirect methods for resolving differences of opinion. Collectivists may also be more interested in demonstrations of con- cern and working through third parties to resolve disputes, whereas individual- ists are more likely to confront differences of opinion directly and openly.

Some research supports this theory. Compared to collectivist Japanese negotia- tors, their more individualist U.S. counterparts are more likely to see offers as unfair and to reject them. Another study revealed that, whereas U.S. managers were more likely to use competing tactics in the face of conflicts, compromising and avoiding were the most preferred methods of conflict management in China.41 Interview data suggest, however, that top management teams in Chinese high-technology firms prefer collaboration even more than compromising and avoiding.42

Cross-cultural negotiations can also create issues of trust.43 One study of Indian and U.S. negotiators found that respondents reported having less trust in their cross-culture negotiation counterparts. The lower level of trust was asso- ciated with less discovery of common interests between parties, which occurred because cross-culture negotiators were less willing to disclose and solicit infor- mation. Another study found that both U.S. and Chinese negotiators tended to have an ingroup bias, which led them to favor negotiating partners from their own cultures. For Chinese negotiators, this was particularly true when account- ability requirements were high.

Having considered conflict—its nature, causes, and consequences—we now turn to negotiation, which often resolves conflict.

MyLab Management Watch It If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/ mylab/management to complete the video exercise.

MyLab Management Personal Inventory Assessments Go to www.pearson.com/mylab/management to complete the Personal Inventory Assessment related to this chapter.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 483 29/09/17 4:25 pm

484 PART 3 The Group

is negotiating over who gets what share of a fixed pie. By fixed pie, we mean a set amount of goods or services to be divvied up. When the pie is fixed, or the parties believe it is, they tend to engage in distributive bargaining.

The essence of distributive bargaining is depicted in Exhibit 14-6. Parties A and B represent two negotiators. Each has a target point that defines what he or she would like to achieve. Each also has a resistance point, which marks the lowest acceptable outcome—the point beyond which the party would break off negotiations rather than accept a less favorable settlement. The area between these two points makes up each party’s aspiration range. As long as there is some overlap between A’s and B’s aspiration ranges, there exists a settlement range in which each one’s aspirations can be met.

When you are engaged in distributive bargaining, one of the best things you can do is make the first offer, and make it an aggressive one. Making the first offer shows power; individuals in power are much more likely to make initial offers, speak first at meetings, and thereby gain the advantage. Another reason this is a good strategy is the anchoring bias, mentioned in Chapter 6. People tend to fixate on initial information. Once that anchoring point has been set, they fail to adequately adjust it based on subsequent information. A savvy nego- tiator sets an anchor with the initial offer, and scores of negotiation studies show that such anchors greatly favor the person who sets them.47

Say that you have a job offer, and your prospective employer asks you what sort of starting salary you want. You’ve just been given a gift—you have a chance to set the anchor, meaning you should ask for the highest salary you think the employer could reasonably offer. Asking for a million dollars is only going to make most of us look ridiculous, which is why we suggest being on the high end of what you think is reasonable. Too often, we err on the side of caution, afraid of scaring off the employer and thus settling for far too little. It is possible to scare off an employer, and it’s true employers don’t like candidates to be asser- tive in salary negotiations, but liking isn’t the same as doing what it takes to hire or retain someone.48 What happens much more often is that we ask for less than we could have obtained.

Integrative Bargaining Jake was a Chicago luxury boutique owned by Jim Wet- zel and Lance Lawson. In the early days of the business, Wetzel and Lawson moved millions of dollars of merchandise from many up-and-coming designers. They developed such a good rapport that many designers would send allot- ments to Jake without requiring advance payment. When the economy soured in 2008, Jake had trouble selling inventory, and designers were not being paid for what they had shipped to the store. Despite the fact that many designers were willing to work with the store on a delayed payment plan, Wetzel and Law- son stopped returning their calls. Lamented one designer, Doo-Ri Chung, “You kind of feel this familiarity with people who supported you for so long. When

distributive bargaining Negotiation that seeks to divide up a fixed amount of resources; a win–lose situation.

fixed pie The belief that there is only a set amount of goods or services to be divvied up between or among the parties.

Negotiation Negotiation permeates the interactions of almost everyone in groups and orga- nizations. There’s the obvious: Labor bargains with management. There’s the not-so-obvious: Managers negotiate with employees, peers, and bosses; sales- people negotiate with customers; purchasing agents negotiate with suppliers. And there’s the subtle: An employee agrees to cover for a colleague for a few minutes in exchange for a future benefit. In today’s loosely structured organi- zations, in which members work with colleagues over whom they have no direct authority and with whom they may not even share a common boss, negotiation skills are critical.

We can define negotiation as a process that occurs when two or more parties decide how to allocate scarce resources.44 Although we commonly think of the outcomes of negotiation in one-shot economic terms, like negotiating over the price of a car, every negotiation in organizations also affects the relationship between negotiators and the way negotiators feel about themselves.45 Depend- ing on how much the parties are going to interact with one another, sometimes maintaining the social relationship and behaving ethically will be just as impor- tant as achieving an immediate outcome of bargaining. Note that we use the terms negotiation and bargaining interchangeably.

Bargaining Strategies There are two general approaches to negotiation—distributive bargaining and integrative bargaining.46 As Exhibit 14-5 shows, they differ in their goal and moti- vation, focus, interests, information sharing, and duration of relationship. Let’s define each and illustrate the differences.

Distributive Bargaining You see a used car advertised for sale online that looks great. You go see the car. It’s perfect, and you want it. The owner tells you the asking price. You don’t want to pay that much. The two of you negotiate. The negotiating strategy you’re engaging in is called distributive bargaining. Its identifying feature is that it operates under zero-sum conditions—that is, any gain I make is at your expense, and vice versa. Every dollar you can get the seller to cut from the car’s price is a dollar you save, and every dollar the seller can get from you comes at your expense. The essence of distributive bargaining

14-3 Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.

negotiation A process in which two or more parties exchange goods or services and attempt to agree on the exchange rate for them.

Distributive versus Integrative BargainingExhibit 14-5

Bargaining Characteristic

Distributive Bargaining

Integrative Bargaining

Goal Get as much of the pie as possible

Expand the pie so that both parties are satisfied

Motivation Win–lose Win–win

Focus Positions (“I can’t go beyond this point on this issue.”)

Interests (“Can you explain why this issue is so important to you?”)

Interests Opposed Congruent

Information sharing Low (Sharing information will only allow other party to take advantage.)

High (Sharing information will allow each party to find ways to satisfy interests of each party.)

Duration of relationship Short term Long term

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 484 29/09/17 4:25 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 485

is negotiating over who gets what share of a fixed pie. By fixed pie, we mean a set amount of goods or services to be divvied up. When the pie is fixed, or the parties believe it is, they tend to engage in distributive bargaining.

The essence of distributive bargaining is depicted in Exhibit 14-6. Parties A and B represent two negotiators. Each has a target point that defines what he or she would like to achieve. Each also has a resistance point, which marks the lowest acceptable outcome—the point beyond which the party would break off negotiations rather than accept a less favorable settlement. The area between these two points makes up each party’s aspiration range. As long as there is some overlap between A’s and B’s aspiration ranges, there exists a settlement range in which each one’s aspirations can be met.

When you are engaged in distributive bargaining, one of the best things you can do is make the first offer, and make it an aggressive one. Making the first offer shows power; individuals in power are much more likely to make initial offers, speak first at meetings, and thereby gain the advantage. Another reason this is a good strategy is the anchoring bias, mentioned in Chapter 6. People tend to fixate on initial information. Once that anchoring point has been set, they fail to adequately adjust it based on subsequent information. A savvy nego- tiator sets an anchor with the initial offer, and scores of negotiation studies show that such anchors greatly favor the person who sets them.47

Say that you have a job offer, and your prospective employer asks you what sort of starting salary you want. You’ve just been given a gift—you have a chance to set the anchor, meaning you should ask for the highest salary you think the employer could reasonably offer. Asking for a million dollars is only going to make most of us look ridiculous, which is why we suggest being on the high end of what you think is reasonable. Too often, we err on the side of caution, afraid of scaring off the employer and thus settling for far too little. It is possible to scare off an employer, and it’s true employers don’t like candidates to be asser- tive in salary negotiations, but liking isn’t the same as doing what it takes to hire or retain someone.48 What happens much more often is that we ask for less than we could have obtained.

Integrative Bargaining Jake was a Chicago luxury boutique owned by Jim Wet- zel and Lance Lawson. In the early days of the business, Wetzel and Lawson moved millions of dollars of merchandise from many up-and-coming designers. They developed such a good rapport that many designers would send allot- ments to Jake without requiring advance payment. When the economy soured in 2008, Jake had trouble selling inventory, and designers were not being paid for what they had shipped to the store. Despite the fact that many designers were willing to work with the store on a delayed payment plan, Wetzel and Law- son stopped returning their calls. Lamented one designer, Doo-Ri Chung, “You kind of feel this familiarity with people who supported you for so long. When

distributive bargaining Negotiation that seeks to divide up a fixed amount of resources; a win–lose situation.

fixed pie The belief that there is only a set amount of goods or services to be divvied up between or among the parties.

Staking Out the Bargaining ZoneExhibit 14-6

Party A’s aspiration range Party B’s aspiration range

Party B’s target point

Party A’s resistance

point

Party B’s resistance

point

Party A’s target point

Settlement range

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 485 29/09/17 4:25 pm

486 PART 3 The Group

they have cash-flow issues, you want to make sure you are there for them as well.”49 Chung’s attitude shows the promise of integrative bargaining. In con- trast to distributive bargaining, integrative bargaining assumes that one or more of the possible settlements can create a win–win solution. Of course, as the Jake example shows, both parties must be engaged for integrative bargain- ing to work.

Exhibit 14-7 illustrates how the two bargaining strategies can be utilized within the same negotiation episode. Early on in the episode, integrative strate- gies can be used, while later in the episode, distributive strategies can be used. Continuing with the previous example, if Wetzel and Lawson agreed to work with Chung to resolve their inventory dilemma, Chung could first clarify her needs to Wetzel and Lawson then articulate her interests in maintaining their relationship, all while trying to not come to a compromise right away. Once all of the needs and interests are established for both parties, she could then switch to a distributive strategy where she sets goals aligned with her needs and interests and attempts to maximize the extent to which these goals are met.

In terms of intraorganizational behavior, integrative bargaining is preferable to distributive bargaining because the former builds long-term relationships.

integrative bargaining Negotiation that seeks one or more settlements that can create a win–win solution.

Officials of General Motors and United Auto Workers participate in the ceremonial handshake that opens new contract negotiations. They are committed to integrative bargaining and work toward negotiating win–win settlements that boost GM’s competi- tiveness. From left are GM CEO Mary Barra, UAW president Dennis Williams, GM VP Cathy Clegg, and UAW VP Cindy Estrada. Source: Paul Sancya/AP Images

Integration of Two Bargaining Strategies Within a Negotiation EpisodeExhibit 14-7

Try to understand your needs and

other party’s needs

Focus on interests, not positions;

articulate interest clearly

Avoid compromising too early, as that often leads to sub-optimal agreements – make sure the interests of both parties are met

Once interests are clarified, now is

the time to set goals

Now that the pie has been expanded,

draw down concessions so that

they get progressively smaller

Integrative: Clarify Needs

Integrative: Articulate Interests

Integrative: Avoid Early Compromise

Distributive: Set High Goals

Distributive: Slice the Pie

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 486 29/09/17 4:26 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 487

Integrative bargaining bonds negotiators and allows them to leave the bargain- ing table feeling they have achieved a victory. Distributive bargaining, however, leaves one party a loser. It tends to build animosity and deepen divisions when people have to work together on an ongoing basis. Research shows that, over repeated bargaining episodes, a losing party who feels positively about the negotiation outcome is much more likely to bargain cooperatively in subse- quent negotiations.

Why, then, don’t we see more integrative bargaining in organizations? The answer lies in the conditions necessary for it to succeed, including opposing parties who are open with information and candid about concerns, are sensi- tive to the other’s needs and trust, and maintain flexibility.50 Because these con- ditions seldom exist in organizations, negotiations often take a win-at-any-cost dynamic. Employees’ personal characteristics and perceived accountability also play a role in whether negotiators come to an integrative solution. The use and effectiveness of negotiation strategies may depend on the regulatory focus of the parties involved (i.e., promotion or prevention focus; see Chapter 7) and accountability to a third party, such as a supervisor. Individuals are also more likely to use integrative bargaining when the other party expresses emotional ambivalence.51

Compromise may be your worst enemy in negotiating a win–win agree- ment. Compromising reduces the pressure to bargain integratively. After all, if you or your opponent caves in easily, no one needs to be creative to reach a settlement. People then settle for less than they could have obtained if they had been forced to consider the other party’s interests, trade off issues, and be creative.52 Consider a classic example in which two siblings are arguing over who gets an orange. Unknown to them, one sibling wants the orange to

Myth or Science? Teams Negotiate Better Than Individuals in Collectivistic Cultures

According to a recent study, this statement appears to be false.In general, the literature has suggested that teams negotiate more effectively than individuals negotiat- ing alone. Some evidence indicates that team negotiations create more ambitious goals, and that teams com- municate more with each other than individual negotiators do.

Common sense suggests that if this is indeed the case, it is especially true in collectivistic cultures, where individu- als are more likely to think of collective goals and be more comfortable work- ing in teams. A study of the negotia- tion of teams in the United States and in Taiwan, however, suggests that this common sense is wrong. The research- ers conducted two studies comparing

two-person teams with individual negotiators. They defined negotiating effectiveness as the degree to which the negotiation produced an optimal outcome for both sides. U.S. teams did better than solo individuals in both studies. In Taiwan, solo individuals did better than teams.

Why did this happen? The research- ers determined that, in Taiwan, norms respecting harmony already exist, and negotiating in teams only amplifies that tendency. This poses a problem because teams “satisfice” (settle for a satisfactory but less than optimal solution) to avoid conflict when norms for cooperation are exceptionally high. When Taiwanese individuals negotiate solo, at least they can clearly represent their own interests. In contrast, because

the United States is individualistic, solo negotiators may focus on their own interests, which makes reaching integra- tive solutions more difficult. When Amer- icans negotiate in teams, they become less inclined to focus on individual inter- ests and therefore can reach solutions.

Overall, these findings suggest that negotiating individually works best in collectivistic cultures, and negotiating in teams works best in individualistic cultures.

Sources: Based on M. J. Gelfand, et al., “Toward a Culture-by-Context Perspective on Negotiation: Negotiating Teams in the United States and Taiwan,” Journal of Applied Psy- chology 98 (2013): 504–13; and A. Graf, S. T. Koeszegi, and E.-M. Pesendorfer, “Elec- tronic Negotiations in Intercultural Inter- firm Relationships,” Journal of Managerial Psychology 25 (2010): 495–512.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 487 29/09/17 4:26 pm

488 PART 3 The Group

drink the juice, whereas the other wants the orange peel to bake a cake. If one capitulates and gives the other the orange, they will not be forced to explore their reasons for wanting the orange, and thus they will never find the win–win solution: They could each have the orange because they want different parts.

The Negotiation Process Exhibit 14-8 provides a simplified model of the negotiation process. It views negotiation as made up of five steps: (1) preparation and planning, (2) defi- nition of ground rules, (3) clarification and justification, (4) bargaining and problem solving, and (5) closure and implementation.53

Preparation and Planning Before you start negotiating, do your homework. What’s the nature of the conflict? What’s the history leading up to this negotia- tion? Who’s involved and what are their perceptions of the conflict? What do you want from the negotiation? What are your goals? If you’re a supply man- ager at Dell Computer, for instance, and your goal is to get a significant cost reduction from your keyboard supplier, make sure this goal stays paramount in discussions and doesn’t get overshadowed by other issues. It helps to put your goals in writing and develop a range of outcomes—from “most hopeful” to “minimally acceptable”—to keep your attention focused.

You should also assess what you think are the other party’s goals. What is he or she likely to ask? How entrenched is his or her position likely to be? What intangible or hidden interests may be important to him or her? On what might he or she be willing to settle? When you can anticipate your opponent’s posi- tion, you are better equipped to counter arguments with facts and figures that support your position.

Relationships change as a result of negotiation, so take that into consider- ation. If you could “win” a negotiation but push the other side into resentment or animosity, it might be wiser to pursue a more compromising style. If preserv- ing the relationship will make you seem easily exploited, you may consider a

14-4 Apply the five steps of the negotiation process.

The NegotiationExhibit 14-8

Preparation and planning

Definition of ground rules

Clarification and justification

Bargaining and problem solving

Closure and implementation

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 488 29/09/17 4:26 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 489

more aggressive style. As an example of how the tone of a relationship in nego- tiations matters, people who feel good about the process of a job offer negotia- tion are more satisfied with their jobs and are less likely to leave the job a year later regardless of their actual outcomes from these negotiations.54

Once you’ve gathered your information, develop a strategy. You should determine your and the other side’s best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA). Your BATNA determines the lowest value acceptable to you for a negotiated agreement. Any offer you receive that is higher than your BATNA is better than an impasse.

In nearly all cases, the party with superior alternatives will do better in a negotiation, so experts advise negotiators to solidify their BATNA prior to any interaction. There is an interesting exception to this general rule— negotiators with absolutely no alternative to a negotiated agreement some- times “go for broke” because they don’t even consider what would happen if the negotiation falls through.55 Think carefully about what the other side is willing to give up. People who underestimate their opponent’s willingness to give on key issues before the negotiation even starts end up with lower out- comes.56 Conversely, you shouldn’t expect success in your negotiation effort unless you’re able to make the other side an offer it finds more attractive than its BATNA.

Definition of Ground Rules Once you’ve done your planning and developed a strategy, you’re ready to define with the other party the ground rules and procedures of the negotiation itself. Who will do the negotiating? Where will it take place? What time constraints, if any, will apply? To what issues will negotia- tion be limited? Will you follow a specific procedure if an impasse is reached? During this phase, the parties will exchange their initial proposals or demands.

Clarification and Justification When you have exchanged initial positions, you and the other party will explain, amplify, clarify, bolster, and justify your origi- nal demands. This step needn’t be confrontational. Rather, it’s an opportunity for educating each other on the issues, why they are important, and how you arrived at your initial demands. Provide the other party with any documenta- tion that supports your position.

Bargaining and Problem Solving The essence of the negotiation process is the actual give-and-take in trying to hash out an agreement. This is where both par- ties need to make concessions.

Closure and Implementation The final step in the negotiation process is formal- izing your agreement and developing procedures necessary for implementing and monitoring it. For major negotiations—from labor–management negotia- tions to bargaining over lease terms—this requires hammering out the specifics in a formal contract. For other cases, closure of the negotiation process is noth- ing more formal than a handshake.

Individual Differences in Negotiation Effectiveness Are some people better negotiators than others? The answer is complex. Four factors influence how effectively individuals negotiate: personality, mood/ emotions, culture, and gender.

BATNA The best alternative to a negotiated agreement; the least a party in a negotiation should accept.

14-5 Show how individual differences influence negotiations.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 489 29/09/17 4:26 pm

490 PART 3 The Group

Personality Traits in Negotiations Can you predict an opponent’s negotiating tactics if you know something about his or her personality? Because personal- ity and negotiation outcomes are related but only weakly, the answer is, at best, sort of.57 Most research has focused on the Big Five trait of agreeableness, for obvious reasons—agreeable individuals are cooperative, compliant, kind, and conflict-averse. We might think such characteristics make agreeable individuals easy prey in negotiations, especially distributive ones. The evidence suggests, however, that overall agreeableness is weakly related to negotiation outcomes. Why is this so?

It appears that the degree to which agreeableness, and personality more generally, affects negotiation outcomes depends on the situation. The impor- tance of being extraverted in negotiations, for example, very much depends on how the other party reacts to someone who is assertive and enthusiastic. One complicating factor for agreeableness is that it has two facets: The tendency to be cooperative and compliant is one, but so is the tendency to be warm and empathetic.58 It may be that while the former is a hindrance to negotiating favorable outcomes, the latter helps. Empathy, after all, is the ability to take the perspective of another person and gain insight into and an understanding of him or her. We know perspective taking benefits integrative negotiations, so perhaps the null effect for agreeableness is due to the two tendencies pulling against one another. If this is the case, then the best negotiator is a competi- tive but empathetic one, and the worst is a gentle but empathetic one. Recent research also suggests that personality traits such as agreeableness and extraver- sion do have an effect, but the effect depends on personality similarity between parties, not overall levels. For example, if both parties are disagreeable, they will negotiate with each other more effectively than if one party was disagree- able and the other were agreeable.59

The type of negotiations may matter as well. In one study, agreeable indi- viduals reacted more positively and felt less stress (measured by their cortisol levels) in integrative negotiations than in distributive ones. Low levels of stress, in turn, made for more effective negotiation outcomes.60 Similarly, in hard- edged distributive negotiations, where giving away information leads to a dis- advantage, extraverted negotiators do less well because they tend to share more information than they should.61

Self-efficacy is one individual-difference variable that seems to relate con- sistently to negotiation outcomes.62 This is a fairly intuitive finding—it isn’t too surprising to hear that those who believe they will be more successful in nego- tiation situations tend to perform more effectively. Maybe individuals who are more confident stake out stronger claims, are less likely to back down from their positions, and exhibit confidence that intimidates others. Although the exact mechanism is not yet clear, it does seem that negotiators may benefit from trying to get a boost in confidence before going to the bargaining table.

Research suggests intelligence predicts negotiation effectiveness, but, as with personality, the effects aren’t especially strong.63 In a sense, these weak links mean you’re not severely disadvantaged, even if you’re an agreeable extravert, when it’s time to negotiate. We all can learn to be better negotiators.64

Moods and Emotions in Negotiations Do moods and emotions influence negotiation? They do, but the way they work depends on the emotion as well as the context. A negotiator who shows anger can induce concessions, for instance, because the other negotiator believes no further concessions from the angry party are possible. One factor that governs this outcome, however, is power—you should show anger in negotiations only if you have at least as much power as your counterpart. If you have less, showing anger actually seems to provoke hardball reactions from the other side.65 Evoking emotions,

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 490 29/09/17 4:26 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 491

such as sympathy, or expressing other emotions like sadness may also be used to persuade others.66

Another factor is how genuine your anger is—“faked” anger, or anger pro- duced from surface acting (see Chapter 4), is not effective, but showing anger that is genuine (deep acting) is.67 It also appears that having a history of show- ing anger, rather than sowing the seeds of revenge, actually induces more con- cessions because the other party perceives the negotiator as tough.68 Finally, culture seems to matter. For instance, one study found that when East Asian participants showed anger, it induced more concessions than when the negotia- tor expressing anger was from the United States or Europe, perhaps because of the stereotype of East Asians as refusing to show anger.69

Another relevant emotion is disappointment. Generally, a negotiator who perceives disappointment from his or her counterpart concedes more. In one study, Dutch students were given 100 chips to bargain over. Negotiators who expressed disappointment were offered 14 more chips than those who didn’t. In a second study, showing disappointment yielded an average concession of 12 chips. Unlike a show of anger, the relative power of the negotiators made no difference in either study.70

Career OBjectives How can I get a better job?

I feel like my career is at a standstill, and I want to talk to my boss about getting a more developmental assign- ment. How can I negotiate effectively for a better job position?

— Wei

Dear Wei: You’re certainly starting out on the right foot. A lot of people focus on salary as a way to achieve success and negoti- ate for the best short-run offer. There’s obviously an advantage to this strategy in the short run, but sustained career growth has better payoffs in the long run. Developing skills can help put you on track for multiple salary increases. A strong skill set from developmental assignments will also give you a better position for future negotiations because you will have more career options.

Long-term career negotiations based on developmental assignments are also often easier to bring up with a supervisor. That’s because salary negotiations are often a zero-sum situ- ation, but career development nego- tiations can bring positive outcomes to both sides. When negotiating for a developmental assignment, make sure

you emphasize a few points with your supervisor:

• When it comes to salary negotiations, either you get the money, or the com- pany keeps the money. Given that, your interests and the interests of your managers are directly opposed. On the other hand, negotiating for developmental assignments usually means finding ways to improve not just your skills but also your contri- bution to the company’s bottom line. You can, in complete honesty, frame the discussion around these mutual benefits.

• Let your supervisor know that you are interested in getting better at your job and that you are motivated to improve through a developmental assignment. Asking your supervisor for opportuni- ties to grow is a clear sign that you are an employee worth investing in.

• Be open to creative solutions. It’s possible that there are some idiosyn- cratic solutions (also called I-deals) for enhancing both your interests and those of your supervisor. One of the best things about an integrative bargaining situation like this is that

you and your negotiation partner can find novel solutions that neither would have imagined separately.

Think strategically about your career, and you’ll likely find you can negotiate not just for a better paycheck tomorrow but for a paycheck that keeps increas- ing in the years to come.

Sources: Based on Y. Rofcanin, T. Kiefer, and K. Strauss, “How I-Deals Build Resources to Facilitate Reciprocation: Mediating Role of Positive Affective States,” Academy of Management Proceedings (August 2014), doi:10.5465/AMBPP.2014.16096abstract; C. Liao, S. J. Wayne, and D. M. Rousseau, “Idiosyncratic Deals in Contemporary Orga- nizations: A Qualitative and Meta-Analytical Review,” Journal of Organizational Behavior (October 16, 2014), doi:10.1002/job.1959; and V. Brenninkmeijer and M. Hekkert-Koning, “To Craft or Not to Craft,” Career Development International 20 (2015): 147–62.

The opinions provided here are of the manag- ers and authors only and do not necessar- ily reflect those of their organizations. The authors or managers are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or managers, or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the opinions provided here.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 491 29/09/17 4:26 pm

492 PART 3 The Group

Anxiety also appears to have an impact on negotiation. For example, one study found that individuals who experienced more anxiety about a negotia- tion used more deceptions in dealing with others.71 Another study found that anxious negotiators expect lower outcomes, respond to offers more quickly, and exit the bargaining process more quickly, leading them to obtain worse outcomes.72

People generally negotiate more effec- tively within cultures than between them. Politeness and positivity char- acterize the typical conflict-avoidant negotiations in Japan, such as with labor union leader Hidekazu Kitagawa (right), shown here presenting wage and benefits demands to Ikuo Mori, president of Fuji Heavy Industries, which makes Subaru vehicles. Source: */Kyodo/Newscom

An Ethical Choice Using Empathy to Negotiate More Ethically

Y ou may have noticed that much of our advice for negotiating effectively depends on under- standing the perspective and goals of the person with whom you are negotiat- ing. Preparing checklists of your negoti- ation partner’s interests, likely tactics, and BATNA have all been shown to improve negotiation outcomes. Can these steps make you a more ethical negotiator as well? Studies suggest that they might.

Researchers asked respondents to indicate how much they tended to think about other people’s feelings and emo- tions and to describe the types of tac- tics they engaged in during a negotiation exercise. More empathetic individuals consistently engaged in fewer unethical negotiation behaviors like making false

promises and manipulating information and emotions.

When considering how to improve your ethical negotiation behavior, follow these guidelines:

1. Try to understand your negotiation partner’s perspective. This isn’t accomplished just by understand- ing cognitively what the other per- son wants but by empathizing with the emotional reaction he or she will likely have to the possible outcomes.

2. Be aware of your own emotions because many moral reactions are fundamentally emotional. One study found that engaging in unethical negotiation strategies increased feelings of guilt so, by extension, feeling guilty in a negotiation may

mean you are engaging in behavior you’ll regret later.

3. Beware of empathizing so much that you work against your own interests. Just because you try to understand the motives and emotional reactions of the other side does not mean you have to assume the other person is going to be honest and fair in return. So be on guard.

Sources: Based on T. R. Cohen, “Moral Emo- tions and Unethical Bargaining: The Differ- ential Effects of Empathy and Perspective Taking in Deterring Deceitful Negotiation,” Journal of Business Ethics 94, no. 4 (2010): 569–79; and R. Volkema, D. Fleck, and A. Hofmeister, “Predicting Competitive- Unethical Negotiating Behavior and Its Con- sequences,” Negotiation Journal 26, no. 3 (2010): 263–86.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 492 29/09/17 4:26 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 493

As you can see, emotions—especially negative ones—matter to negotiation. Even emotional unpredictability affects outcomes; researchers have found that negotiators who express positive and negative emotions in an unpredictable way extract more concessions because this behavior makes the other party feel less in control.73 As one negotiator put it, “Out of the blue, you may have to react to something you have been working on in one way, and then something entirely new is introduced, and you have to veer off and refocus.”74

Culture in Negotiations Do people from different cultures negotiate differ- ently? The simple answer is the obvious one: Yes, they do. However, there are many nuances in the way this works. It isn’t as simple as “these negotiators are the best”; indeed, success in negotiations depends on the context.

So what can we say about culture and negotiations? First, it appears that people generally negotiate more effectively within cultures than between them. For example, a Colombian is apt to do better negotiating with a Colombian than with a Sri Lankan. Second, it appears that in cross-cultural negotiations, it is especially important that the negotiators be high in openness. This suggests a good strategy is to choose cross-cultural negotiators who are high on openness to experience, and to avoid factors such as time pressure that tend to inhibit learning about the other party.75 Third, people are more likely to use certain negotiation strategies depending on what culture they belong to. For example, people from China and Qatar are more likely to use a competitive negotiation strategy than do people from the United States.76

Because emotions are culturally sensitive, negotiators need to be especially aware of the emotional dynamics in cross-cultural negotiation. One study, for example, explicitly compared how U.S. and Chinese negotiators reacted to an angry counterpart. Chinese negotiators increased their use of distributive negotiating tactics, whereas U.S. negotiators decreased their use of these tac- tics. That is, Chinese negotiators began to drive a harder bargain once they saw that their negotiation partner was becoming angry, whereas U.S. negotia- tors capitulated somewhat in the face of angry demands. Why the difference? It may be that individuals from East Asian cultures feel that using anger to get their way in a negotiation is not a legitimate tactic, so they refuse to cooperate when their opponents become upset.77

Gender Differences in Negotiations There are many areas of organizational behavior (OB) in which men and women are not that different. Negotiation is not one of them. It seems fairly clear that men and women negotiate dif- ferently, men and women are treated differently by negotiation partners, and these differences affect outcomes (see OB Poll).

A popular stereotype is that women are more cooperative and pleasant in negotiations than men. Though this is controversial, there is some merit to it. Men tend to place a higher value on status, power, and recognition, whereas women tend to place a higher value on compassion and altruism. Women do tend to value relationship outcomes more than men, and men tend to value economic outcomes more than women.78

These differences affect both negotiation behavior and negotiation outcomes. Compared to men, women tend to behave in a less assertive, less self-interested, and more accommodating manner. As one review concluded, women “are more reluctant to initiate negotiations, and when they do initiate negotiations, they ask for less, are more willing to accept [the] offer, and make more generous offers to their negotiation partners than men do.”79 A study of MBA students at Carnegie- Mellon University found that the male students took the step of negotiating their first offer 57 percent of the time, compared to 4 percent for the female students. The net result? A $4,000 difference in starting salaries.80

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 493 29/09/17 4:26 pm

494 PART 3 The Group

One comprehensive literature review suggests that the tendency for men to receive better negotiation outcomes in some situations does not cover all situa- tions.81 Indeed, evidence suggested women and men bargained more equally in certain situations, women sometimes outperformed men, and men and women obtained more nearly equal outcomes when negotiating on behalf of someone else. In other words, everyone was better at advocating for others than they were at advocating for themselves. Another review of 123 studies found that gender differences are smaller when negotiators have experience with negoti- ating. Women also perform better in situations with low role incongruity.82

Factors that increased the predictability of negotiations also tended to reduce gender differences. When the range of negotiation settlements was well defined, men and women were more equal in outcomes. When more experi- enced negotiators were at the table, men and women were also more nearly equivalent. The study authors proposed that when situations are more ambigu- ous, with less well-defined terms and less experienced negotiators, stereotypes may have stronger effects, leading to larger gender differences in outcomes.

So what can be done to change this troublesome state of affairs? First, organizational culture plays a role. If an organization, even unwittingly, rein- forces gender-stereotypic behaviors (men negotiating competitively, women negotiating cooperatively), it will negatively affect negotiations when anyone goes against stereotype. Men and women need to know that it is acceptable for each to show a full range of negotiating behaviors. Thus, a female negotiator who behaves competitively and a male negotiator who behaves cooperatively need to know that they are not violating expectations. Making sure negotia- tions are designed to focus on well-defined and work-related terms also has promise for reducing gender differences by minimizing the ambiguous space for stereotypes to operate. This focus on structure and work relevance also obviously helps focus negotiations on factors that improve the organization’s performance.

Research is less clear on whether women can improve their outcomes by showing some gender-stereotypic behaviors. Researchers Laura Kray and col- leagues suggested that female negotiators who were instructed to behave with “feminine charm” (be animated in body movements, make frequent eye con- tact with their partners, smile, laugh, be playful, and frequently compliment

Men Ask More

Source: Based on A. Gouveia, “Why Americans Are Too Scared to Negotiate Salary,” San Francisco Chronicle, April 3, 2013, downloaded May 30, 2013, from http://www.sfgate.com/jobs/.

Do you always negotiate for salary following a job offer?

Women Men

Yes 30%No

70% No 54%

Yes 46%

OB POLL

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 494 29/09/17 4:26 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 495

their partners) did better in negotiations than women not so instructed. These behaviors didn’t work for men.83

Other researchers disagree and argue that what can best benefit women is to break down gender stereotypes for the individuals who hold them.84 It’s pos- sible this is a short-term/long-term situation: In the short term, women can gain an advantage in negotiation by being both assertive and charming, but in the long term, their interests are best served by eliminating these sorts of sex role stereotypes.

Evidence suggests women’s own attitudes and behaviors hurt them in nego- tiations. Managerial women demonstrate less confidence than men in anticipa- tion of negotiating and are less satisfied with their performance afterward, even when their performance and the outcomes they achieve are similar to those for men.85 Women are also less likely to see an ambiguous situation as an oppor- tunity for negotiation. Women may unduly penalize themselves by failing to engage in negotiations that would be in their best interests. Some research sug- gests that women are less aggressive in negotiations because they are worried about backlash from others.

Negotiating in a Social Context We have been mostly discussing negotiations that occur among parties that meet only once and in isolation from other individuals. In organizations, how- ever, many negotiations are open-ended and public. When you are trying to figure out who in a work group should do a tedious task, negotiating with your boss to get a chance to travel internationally, or asking for more money for a project, there’s a social component to the negotiation. You are probably negotiating with someone you already know and will work with again, and the negotiation and its outcome are likely to be topics people will talk about. To understand negotiations in practice, then, we must consider the social factors of reputation and relationships.

Reputation Your reputation is the way other people think and talk about you. When it comes to negotiation, having a reputation for being trustworthy matters. In short, trust in a negotiation process opens the door to many forms of integra- tive negotiation strategies that benefit both parties.86 The most effective way to build trust is to behave in an honest way across repeated interactions. Then others will feel more comfortable making open-ended offers with many differ- ent outcomes. This helps to achieve win–win outcomes because both parties can work to achieve what is most important to themselves while still benefitting the other party.

Sometimes we either trust or distrust people based on word of mouth about a person’s characteristics. What type of characteristics help a person develop a trustworthy reputation? A combination of competence and integrity.87 Nego- tiators higher in self-confidence and cognitive ability are seen as more compe- tent by negotiation partners.88 They are also considered better able to describe accurately a situation and their own resources, and they are more credible when they make suggestions for creative solutions to impasses. Individuals who have a reputation for integrity can also be more effective in negotiations.89 They are seen as more likely to keep their promises and present information accurately, so others are more willing to accept their promises as part of a bar- gain. This opens many options for the negotiator that wouldn’t be available to someone who is not seen as trustworthy. Finally, individuals who have more

14-6 Assess the roles and functions of third-party negotiations.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 495 29/09/17 4:26 pm

496 PART 3 The Group

solid reputations are better liked and have more friends and allies—in other words, they have more social resources, which may give them more implicit power in negotiations.

Relationships There is more to repeated negotiations than just reputation. The social, inter- personal component of relationships with repeated negotiations means that individuals go beyond valuing what is simply good for themselves and instead start to think about what is best for the other party and the relationship as a whole.90 Repeated negotiations built on a foundation of trust also broaden the range of options because a favor or concession today can be offered in return for some repayment further down the road.91 Repeated negotiations also facili- tate integrative problem solving. This occurs partly because people begin to see their negotiation partners in a more personal way over time and come to share emotional bonds.92 Repeated negotiations also make integrative approaches more workable because a sense of trust and reliability has been built up.93

In sum, it’s clear that an effective negotiator needs to think about more than just the outcomes of a single interaction. Negotiators who consistently act in a way that demonstrates competence, honesty, and integrity usually have bet- ter outcomes in the long run.

Third-Party Negotiations Until this point, we’ve discussed bargaining in terms of direct negotiations. Occasionally, however, individuals or group representatives reach a stalemate and are unable to resolve their differences through direct negotiations. In such cases, they may turn to a third party to help them find a solution. There are three basic third-party roles: mediator, arbitrator, and conciliator.

A mediator is a neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by using reasoning and persuasion, suggesting alternatives, and the like. Media- tors are widely used in labor–management negotiations and in civil court dis- putes. Their overall effectiveness is fairly impressive. For example, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) reported a settlement rate through mediation at 72.1 percent.94 But the situation is the key to whether mediation will succeed; the conflicting parties must be motivated to bargain and resolve their conflict. In addition, conflict intensity can’t be too high; medi- ation is most effective under moderate levels of conflict. Finally, perceptions of the mediator are important; to be effective, the mediator must be perceived as neutral and noncoercive.

An arbitrator is a third party with the authority to dictate an agreement. Arbitration can be voluntary (requested by the parties) or compulsory (forced on the parties by law or contract). The big plus of arbitration over mediation is that it always results in a settlement. Whether there is a downside depends on how heavy-handed the arbitrator appears. If one party is left feeling overwhelm- ingly defeated, that party is certain to be dissatisfied and the conflict may resur- face at a later time.

A conciliator is a trusted third party who provides an informal communica- tion link between the negotiator and the opponent. This role was made famous by Robert Duval in the first Godfather film. As Don Corleone’s adopted son and a lawyer by training, Duval acted as an intermediary between the Corleones and the other Mafioso families. Comparing conciliation to mediation in terms of effectiveness has proven difficult because the two overlap a great deal. In practice, conciliators typically act as more than mere communication conduits. They also engage in fact finding, interpret messages, and persuade disputants to develop agreements.

mediator A neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by using reasoning, persuasion, and suggestions for alternatives.

arbitrator A third party to a negotiation who has the authority to dictate an agreement.

conciliator A trusted third party who provides an informal communication link between the negotiator and the opponent.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 496 29/09/17 4:26 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 497

Summary While many people assume conflict lowers group and organizational perfor- mance, this assumption is frequently incorrect. Conflict can be either construc- tive or destructive to the functioning of a group or unit. Levels of conflict can be either too high or too low to be constructive. Either extreme hinders per- formance. An optimal level is one that prevents stagnation, stimulates creativity, allows tensions to be released, and initiates the seeds of change without being disruptive or preventing the coordination of activities.

Implications for Managers ● Choose an authoritarian management style in emergencies, when unpop-

ular actions need to be implemented (such as cost cutting, enforcement of unpopular rules, discipline), and when the issue is vital to the organi- zation’s welfare. Be certain to communicate your logic when possible to make certain others remain engaged and productive.

● Seek integrative solutions when your objective is to learn, when you want to merge insights from people with different perspectives, when you need to gain commitment by incorporating concerns into a consensus, and when you need to work through feelings that have interfered with a relationship.

● You can build trust by accommodating others when you find you’re wrong, when you need to demonstrate reasonableness, when other posi- tions need to be heard, when issues are more important to others than to yourself, when you want to satisfy others and maintain cooperation, when you can build social credits for later issues, to minimize loss when you are outmatched and losing, and when others should learn from their own mistakes.

● Consider compromising when goals are important but not worth poten- tial disruption, when opponents with equal power are committed to mutually exclusive goals, and when you need temporary settlements to complex issues.

● Distributive bargaining can resolve disputes, but it often reduces the sat- isfaction of one or more negotiators because it is confrontational and focused on the short term. Integrative bargaining, in contrast, tends to provide outcomes that satisfy all parties and build lasting relationships.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 497 29/09/17 4:26 pm

498 PART 3 The Group

Sources: Based on A. Nunes, “Unions Are Hurting Public Safety,” Forbes, April 10, 2017, https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleynunes/2017/04/10/ unions-are-hurting-public-safety/2/#396682da516e; Rasmussen Polling, “Most Say Union Leaders Out of Touch with Members,” Rasmussen Reports, August 10, 2016, http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2016/most_say_union_leaders_ out_of_touch_with_members; D. DeMay, “Driver Union, for Lyft, Uber, Forces Seattle to Ask Tough Questions about ‘Gig’ Economy,” Seattle Post- Intelligencer, December 19, 2016, http://www.seattlepi.com/local/transportation/article/Driver-union-for-Lyft-Uber-forces-Seattle-to-10797019. php; M. Murro, “The Gig Economy: Complement or Cannibal?,” Brookings, November 17, 2016, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/ 2016/11/17/the-gig-economy-complement-or-cannibal/; Reuters, “Unions and the Gig Economy Are Gearing Up for Battle in This State,” Fortune, November 28, 2016, http://fortune.com/2016/11/28/unions-gig-economy-new-york/; and K. Kokalitcheva, “Uber Lost Hundreds of Millions in the Most Recent Quarter,” Fortune, December 19, 2016, http://fortune.com/2016/12/19/uber-financials-2016/.

Nonunion Positions and the Gig Economy Are Bad for Workers

POINT

W hat do Uber, Etsy, and Amazon Turk all have in common? All of these platforms are fuel for short-term freelance work, and a reflection of what economists have dubbed the gig economy. Fifty years ago, employers expected workers to stay with a company for 30 years. In exchange for their loyalty, employees were given more opportunities and a pension. Unlike the labor market of today, companies promoted from within. As this practice fell by the wayside, employers hired employees for shorter and shorter periods. Now, many new jobs are not long-term or even short-term positions: They’re gigs. Employees work as indepen- dent contractors, using third-party platforms to connect to clients. Because these employees do not have a traditional employment contract, they have complete flexibility: They can work as much or as little as they want.

Unfortunately, many of these platforms have a dirty secret. Unlike regular employment, people who are employed primarily through gigs do not have the benefits of a traditional job. Because they’re consid- ered self-employed, they do not get paid for overtime, do not receive benefits, and have no collective bargaining power. There’s also evi- dence that they’re replacing rather than supplementing more stable employment. For example, Uber and Lyft drivers tripled in Silicon Val- ley from 2012 to 2014, while payrolled cab and limo jobs decreased by 31 percent in the same time period.

Without the ability to collectively bargain, the labor market is akin to the Wild West. That’s why many freelancers on these platforms are trying to unionize. In New York and Seattle, labor unions are trying to allow gig employees that work as rideshare drivers, house clean- ers, and delivery persons the ability to create collective bargaining units. Doing so will allow employees to demand health benefits and overtime. It will also ensure that these employees make a living hourly wage, which is rare for gig employees based on recent research. Many employees, despite working 60 hours a week, still do not make as much as a traditional employee.

Yes, it’s great for employers to sell younger generations on the flex- ibility of these positions. But in exchange for flexibility, they are also losing the power to negotiate for fair working conditions. Let’s stop pretending that freelance work platforms like Uber are good for the economy, and leave the gig economy trend at the curb.

COUNTERPOINT

W hile the gig economy has its drawbacks, these platforms exist for a reason. Employers and employees alike are fed up with traditional employment. Yes, some people who work through freelance apps use it as a primary source of income. But there are just as many, if not more, who just want a flexible second job to get a little extra cash. If these positions were like the services they are replacing (e.g., cab companies), then gig employees would have to agree to specific policies regarding sick days and work a set schedule.

I’m also skeptical of this idea that freelancers are replacing tra- ditional employment. Yes, some city-level data shows that gig-based jobs increased while payroll jobs decreased. But there are also more data from 2010 to 2014 that suggest that contractor and payroll jobs have increased in most sectors that support freelance platforms. For example, while use of freelance platforms like Airbnb increased over four years, payroll jobs in hospitality also increased. The same is true for the transportation industry over the same time period. If anything, the reason these freelance platforms have been so successful is because these industries are growing. It’s not that they’re replacing traditional services—they’re meeting the demand that traditional ser- vices cannot fulfill.

The benefits of having a collective bargaining agreement may also be exaggerated. Whenever a group tries to create a collective bar- gaining agreement, it causes conflict. A 2016 poll indicates that most employees (80 percent) believe leaders will not protect the interests of the group as a whole. Instead, leaders usually use their power in numbers to protect their own self-interests in negotiations.

Collective bargaining doesn’t just hurt businesses—it also hurts the public. For example, the International Civil Aviation Organization has been trying to put cameras in commercial airline cockpits. These cameras would allow authorities and employers to monitor pilots on the job. These videos can help piece together why plane crashes occur. Yet pilots have been using collective bargaining techniques to fight the initiative on grounds that it violates airline pilots’ privacy. They also insist that it could be used to “lead investigators away from accurate conclusions” regarding employees’ performance.

Yes, traditional employment allows employees to bargain for rights as a group. But this also leads to concessions and conflict that do not benefit employees or their employers.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 498 29/09/17 4:26 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 499

CHAPTER REVIEW

QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW

14-1 What are the three types of conflict and the three loci of conflict?

14-2 What are the steps in the conflict process? 14-3 What are the differences between distributive and integrative bargaining?

14-4 What are the five steps in the negotiation process?

14-5 How do individual differences influence negotiations?

14-6 What are the roles and functions of third-party negotiations?

APPLICATION AND EMPLOYABILITY Conflict is an inevitable part of every workplace. As you learned in this chapter, conflict is also beneficial in certain contexts. You also learned about negotia- tion, and how and when certain negotiation and con- flict resolution strategies may be used. While exploring these topics, you used many skills that can help you be more employable. You learned collaboration while exploring why collectivist teams are not better negotia- tors, learned how to use concepts from the chapter to

move forward in your career, and assessed how to be a more empathetic negotiator. You also applied your knowledge of bargaining to America’s growing gig economy. In the next section, you will develop these skills further while also using your critical thinking skills to evaluate the pros and cons of unions, resolve a conflict between coworkers, assess how to deal with an overly assertive employee, and take part in a negotia- tion role play.

MyLab Management Discussion Questions Go to www.pearson.com/mylab/management to complete the problems marked with this icon .

EXPERIENTIAL EXERCISE A Negotiation Role Play You will consider two scenarios for this case: One is more distributive, the other more integrative. Form pairs, with one of you taking the role of the engineering director, and the other taking the role of the marketing director. Read only your own side’s specific information for the two negotiation processes. The overall situation is the same for both scenarios, but the priorities and outlook for the parties change depending on whether you are negotiat- ing the “contested resources” scenario or the “combined future” scenario.

The Case Cytrix develops integrated bicycle and running per- formance systems. Runners and bikers wear the Cytrix watch, which uses GPS signals to identify their location

and the distance they’ve covered. This information can then be uploaded to the Cytrix Challenge website, where users record their performance over time. Social media tools also allow them to compare their performance rela- tive to that of friends. The majority of users are either amateur student athletes or committed adult hobbyists like marathon runners.

The organization needs to determine how to allo- cate a fixed pool of resources for future development between the marketing and engineering groups. Rather than making an executive decision about resource allo- cation, the top management team has asked the respec- tive teams to allocate $30 million for planned future development and decide who will run different parts of the project.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 499 29/09/17 4:26 pm

500 PART 3 The Group

Specific Information for the Marketing Group

Only the marketing manager should read this section.

The marketing group has been tracking the major areas of sales and has come to the conclusion that Cytrix has saturated the market. New sources of customers, especially general consumers who are interested in health but are not committed athletes, will need to be considered for fu- ture growth. Research into sales of competitive products and areas where competitors are failing to meet consumer demands is needed. The marketing group’s primary goal is to allocate sufficient resources to finance the research. The group also wants to retain control over which new products will be developed. Marketing would prefer to see engineer- ing act in a consulting role, determining how best to manu- facture the devices that fit the needs identified above.

Specific Information for the Engineering Group

Only the engineering manager should read this section.

The engineering group has recently been tracking the de- velopment of new hardware that will improve the accuracy of distance and speed estimates in remote areas. Several other companies are already experimenting with similar designs. To realize this improvement fully, engineering be- lieves it will be necessary to develop the technology further so it is both lightweight and inexpensive to produce. The engineering group’s primary goal is to allocate sufficient re- sources to develop these new technologies. The engineers would prefer to see marketing act in a consulting role, de- termining how best to advertise and deliver the new devices.

Contested Resources Scenario The marketing and engineering departments are locked in a struggle for power. Your side (either marketing or

engineering) should try to direct the largest possible pro- portion of both money and authority toward your pro- posed program. You still need to think of a solution in which the other side ultimately agrees to assist you in im- plementing the program. If you can’t reach an agreement for shared resources, the CEO will appoint new directors for both groups.

Combined Future Scenario The marketing and engineering departments are eager to find a positive solution. Both sides should try to see that the company’s future needs are met. You know that to achieve success everyone needs to work together, so you’d like to find a way to divide the money and resources that benefits both marketing and engineering. Plans can incor- porate multiple techniques for sharing and collaborating with resources.

The Negotiation At the start of the negotiation, the instructor randomly as- signs half the groups to the contested resources scenario and the other half to the combined future scenario. Begin the process by outlining the goals and resources for your side of the negotiation. Then negotiate over the terms de- scribed in your scenario, attempting to advocate for a solu- tion that matches your perspective.

Debriefing Afterward, you will get together with the other students to discuss the processes used. Especially consider the differ- ences in outcomes between the contested resources and combined future scenarios. Either scenario could arise in a real work environment, so think about how different ne- gotiation situations give rise to different strategies, tactics, and outcomes.

ETHICAL DILEMMA The Case of the Overly Assertive Employee In this chapter, we learned about several conflict-han- dling intentions. Each of these intentions involved two dimension—assertiveness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy his or her own concerns) and coop- erativeness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy the other party’s concerns). Consider these dimen- sions, and then put yourself in the shoes of the manager described below.

Tom is a manager at a small copy supply firm. Their marketing team consists mainly of two employees: Janna and Kim. Kim is incredibly assertive, while Janna is incred- ibly cooperative. Though you are their manager, they sometimes have the discretion to negotiate with each other over who is responsible for which task in a project. You notice that Janna seems always to do the most tedious, unpleasant tasks. When you’ve asked Janna in the past

if she is happy with what she contributes to projects, she meekly replies, “I don’t mind. I don’t want to make any waves.”

You sense that Janna is unhappy but also scared of a confrontation with Kim. Kim is getting more recognition and compliments from the CEO because she does high- profile work. You know this puts Janna at a disadvantage in her career. On the other hand, Kim is overly assertive. You know that if you ask her to be more cooperative, it could cause more conflict in the office.

As we learned about relationship conflict, it’s almost never beneficial. Yes, it may be unfair to Janna, but you don’t want to disrupt the team by bringing conflict into the office. You also know that conflict tends to spread in the office—if Kim and Janna are at odds with each other, it may distract people on other teams.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 500 29/09/17 4:26 pm

Conflict and Negotiation CHAPTER 14 501

Questions 14-7. If Tom does nothing, is that ethical? Does he have

a responsibility to Janna to make sure her concerns are addressed?

14-8. In this chapter, you learned about mediators, arbi- trators, and conciliators. Is it possible for Tom to act in one of these roles? Why or why not?

14-9. If Tom does nothing in this situation, how do you think the situation between Janna and Kim will play out? Do you think there will be problems with conflict?

CASE INCIDENT 1 Disorderly Conduct The sound of Matt and Peter’s arguing is familiar to every- one in the office by now. In an effort to make the best use of space and ensure a free flow of discussion and ideas, the founder of Markay Design had decided to convert the one-floor office of the company to an open plan with no walls between workers. The goal of such a layout is to eliminate boundaries and enhance creativity. But for Matt and Peter, the new arrangement creates a growing sense of tension.

The argument boils down to the question of work- space order and organization. Peter prefers to keep his desk completely clean and clear, and he keeps a stack of cleaning wipes in a drawer to eliminate any dust or dirt. Matt, on the other hand, likes to keep all his work visible on his desk, so sketches, plans, magazines, and photos are scattered everywhere, alongside boxes of crackers and coffee cups. Peter finds it hard to concentrate when he sees Matt’s piles of materials everywhere, while Matt feels he can be more creative and free flowing when he’s not forced to clean and organize constantly. Many of Matt and Peter’s coworkers wish they’d just let the issue drop. The men enjoyed a good working relationship in the past, with Peter’s attention to detail and thorough planning serv- ing to rein in some of Matt’s wild inspirations. But of late, their collaborations have been derailed in disputes.

Everyone knows it’s not productive to engage in con- flicts over every small irritant in the workplace. However,

completely avoiding conflict can be equally negative. An emerging body of research has examined so-called conflict cultures in organizations. The findings suggest having a culture that actively avoids and suppresses con- flicts is associated with lower levels of creativity. Cultures that push conflict underground but do not succeed in reducing the underlying tensions can become passive- aggressive, marked by underhanded behavior against other coworkers.

Ultimately, finding a way through the clutter dispute is probably going to be an ongoing process to find a balance between perspectives. Both Matt and Peter worry that if they can’t find a solution, their usually positive work rela- tionship will be too contentious to bear. And that would be a real mess.

Questions 14-10. Describe some of the factors that led this situation

to become an open conflict. 14-11. Do you think this is an issue worth generating con-

flict over? What are the potential costs and benefits of Matt and Peter having an open discussion of the issues?

14-12. How can Matt and Peter develop an active prob- lem-solving discussion to resolve this conflict? What could effectively be changed, and what is probably going to remain a problem?

Sources: Based on S. Shellenbarger, “Clashing over Office Clutter,” Wall Street Journal, March 19, 2014, http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304747404579447331212245004; S. Shellenbarger, “To Fight or Not to Fight? When to Pick Workplace Battles,” Wall Street Journal, December 17, 2014, http://www.wsj.com/articles/picking-your-workplace-battles-1418772621; and M. J. Gelfand, J. R. Harrington, and L. M. Leslie, “Conflict Cultures: A New Frontier for Conflict Management Research and Practice,” in N. M. Ashkanasy, O. B. Ayoko, and K. A. Jehn (eds.), Handbook of Conflict Manage- ment Research (Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 2014): 109–35.

CASE INCIDENT 2 Rubber Rooms and Collective Bargaining U.S. labor unions have seen a dramatic decline in mem- bership in the private sector, where only 6.5 percent of the employees are unionized. The situation is very different in the public sector, however, where 40 percent of govern- ment employees are unionized. These numbers are the result of very different trends—in the 1950s, the situation

was approximately reversed, with roughly 35 percent of private-sector workers and 12 percent of public-sector employees belonging to unions.

Research suggests two core reasons public-sector unions have grown. First, changes in state and national labor laws have made it easier for public-sector unions

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 501 29/09/17 4:26 pm

502 PART 3 The Group

to organize. Some also argue that enforcement agencies have tolerated antiunion actions in the private sector. Second, the location of private-sector jobs has changed; high-paying union jobs in the manufacturing sector, the steel industry, and other former bastions of private-sector unionization have mostly gone overseas or to the South, where it’s harder to organize workers. On the other hand, it’s difficult to move government jobs away from the com- munities they serve. A Philadelphia school, for example, couldn’t just decide it was going to relocate its teachers to Atlanta. Also, public-sector labor forces tend to be more static than in the private sector. More plants than post offices have closed.

Are these trends problems? Though this is partly a political question, let’s look at it objectively in terms of pluses and minuses.

On the positive side, by negotiating as a collective, unionized workers are able to earn, on average, roughly 15 percent more than their nonunion counterparts. Unions can also protect the rights of workers against capricious actions by employers. Consider the following example:

Lydia criticized the work of five of her coworkers. They were not amused and posted angry messages on a Face- book page. Lydia complained to her supervisor that the postings violated the employer’s zero tolerance policy against bullying and harassment. The employer investigat- ed and, agreeing that its policy had been violated, fired the five. However, the National Labor Relations Board ruled this an unfair labor practice and ordered them reinstated.

Most of us would probably prefer not to be fired for Facebook posts. This is a protection unions can provide.

On the negative side, public-sector unions at times have been able to negotiate employment arrangements that are hard to sustain. For more than 25 years, the union that represents California’s prison guards—the California Cor- rectional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA)—has lob- bied to increase the number of prisons and to increase sentences (through primarily the three-strikes initiatives). The lobbying has worked; additional prisons have been built, the prison population has exploded, and thousands of new prison personnel have been hired. With its mem- bership at almost 30,000 and with millions of dollars for

skillful lobbying, the power of the CCPOA would now be difficult to overestimate. As a result, an entry-level correc- tions officer can earn up to $65,000 in base salary with generous benefits, plus over $100,000 in overtime and bonuses, after just 4 months of free training. All this is at the expense of taxpayers in a state where the budget is “precariously balanced and faces the prospect of deficits in succeeding years.”

It is often extremely difficult to fire a member of a public-sector union, even if performance is exception- ally poor. Aryeh Eller, a former music teacher at Hillcrest High School in Queens, New York, was pulled from the classroom for repeated sexual harassment of female stu- dents, a charge to which he admitted. While in the so- called rubber room, where union members unfit to work are paid their full wage just to sit, Eller’s salary increased to $85,000 due to automatic seniority increases under the teachers’ union contract. Such protections exist for teach- ers in nearly every state, sheltering even those arrested for having sex with minors and giving minors drugs. Teachers are not alone. There are rubber rooms for many types of union jobs.

Reasonable people can disagree about the pros and cons of unions and whether they help or hinder an orga- nization’s ability to be successful. There isn’t any dispute, however, that they often figure prominently in the study of workplace conflict and negotiation strategies.

Questions 14-13. Labor–management negotiations might be char-

acterized as more distributive than integrative. Do you agree? Why do you think this is the case? What, if anything, would you do about it?

14-14. If unions have negotiated unreasonable agree- ments, what responsibility does management or the administration bear for agreeing to these terms? Why do you think they do agree to such terms?

14-15. Assume that you are advising union and man- agement representatives about how to negotiate an agreement. Drawing on the concepts in this chapter, what would you tell them?

Sources: Based on L. Apple, “Spoiled California Prison Guards Have It Easy,” Gawker Media, April 30, 2011, http://gawker.com/5797381/spoiled-california-prison-guards-have-it-easy; “Aryeh Eller, New York Teacher Removed from Classroom for Sexual Harassment, Paid Nearly $1 Million to Do Noth- ing,” Huffington Post, January 28, 2013, downloaded May 20, 2013, from www.huffingtonpost.com; “Hispanics United of Buffalo, Inc. and Carlos Ortiz,” Case 03–CA–027872, National Labor Relations Board, December 14, 2012, www.nlrb.gov/cases-decisions/board-decisions; E. G. Brown, “2015–16 May Revision to the California State Budget,” http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/2015-16/pdf/Revised/ Budget Summary/Introduction.pdf; S. Soriano, “CCPOA’s Clout High, but Profile Low,” Capitol Weekly, November 19, 2014, http://capitolweekly.net/ccpoa-transition-powerful-low-profile- campaign-spending/; and J. Weissmann, “Who’s to Blame for the Hostess Bankruptcy: Wall Street, Unions, or Carbs? The Atlantic, November 16, 2012, downloaded May 29, 2013, from www .theatlantic.com/.

M14_ROBB9329_18_SE_C14.indd 502 29/09/17 4:26 pm